* LI 



ii 

RECENT CENTRALIZING TENDENCIES IN STATE 
EDUCATIONAL ADMINISTRATION 



STUDIES IN HISTORY, ECONOMICS AND PUBLIC LAW 



EDITED BY THE FACULTY OF POLITICAL SCIENCE OF 
COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY 



11 

IN THE CITY OF NEW YORK. 



Volume VIS!] 



[Number 2 



RECENT CENTRALIZING TENDENCIES 



IK 



STATE EDUCATIONAL ADMINISTRATION 



BY 



WILLIAM CLARENCE WEBSTER, Ph.D. 

Seligman Fellow in Administration 




COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY 

Mm fnxk 
1897 
- 



^ 



i^* 






CONTENTS 



PAGE 

CHAPTER I 
Introduction 7 



CHAPTER II 
The Relation of State Aid to State Control of Education ... 12 

CHAPTER III 
General Outline of Present State Educational Administration . 16 

CHAPTER IV 
The Rise and Fall of the " District System " 23 

CHAPTER V 
Compulsory Education 32 

CHAPTER VI 
State Regulation of Text-Books 49 

CHAPTER VII 

State Regulation of Courses of Study 60 

5 



v i CONTENTS 



PAGE 



CHAPTER VIII 

State Control of Teachers' Examinations 63 

CHAPTER IX 
State Control of Teachers' Institutes ,68 

CHAPTER X 

Appellate Jurisdiction of State Superintendents and State 

Boards 73 



CHAPTER I 

INTRODUCTION 

ALTHOUGH popular education, since the earliest days of 
New England history, has been fondly cherished as one of 
the chief characteristics and safe-guards of our American 
polity, and although public schools early became quite gen- 
erally diffused, especially throughout the North, yet at the 
opening of the present century it could scarcely be said that 
any of the States had what could be dignified by the term a 
" public school system." Almost everywhere throughout 
the country the establishment and continued maintenance of 
free public schools depended chiefly upon local initiative 
and local public sentiment, while so far from there being any 
effective control and supervision of the schools, this factor 
was almost entirely wanting in every State. What little 
control and supervision existed was local, and took in no 
larger area than the township or county, and with the general 
establishment of the so-called " district system " was ushered 
in an era of the most extreme decentralization conceivable, 
during which a multitude of petty local boards and " direct- 
ors " ruled supreme in their infinitesimal districts. Each 
district was a law unto itself; of uniformity and system 
there was none. 

This extreme decentralization in educational administra- 
tion lasted till quite late in the present century, but grad- 
ually as population advanced and wealth accumulated the 
primitive conditions gave way to modern complexities, and 
as a result the early decentralization has also been obliged 
H9] 7 



C S VT&ALIZATION IN EDUCATION [ic 

to give way at man)- points. During the first half of the 
present century (roughly speaking) township and county 
supervision over the expenditure of school moneys, the levy- 
ing of local school taxes, the erection and repair of school 
houses, the fixing of school terms and salaries, and other 
matters of a purely business character, was constantly be- 
coming more and more thorough. During the latter half of 
this century this control has been gradually extended to an 
oversight of educational methods and courses of study, the 
qualifications and selection of teachers, grading, classifica- 
tion, discipline and sanitation. And, furthermore, during 
the latter period, township and county supervision has been 
quite generally supplemented by more or less thorough 
State control over many branches of school administration. 
First of all there were developed in most of the States 
special school funds and a general system of taxation for 
the encouragement and partial support of public schools. 
Parallel with and closely connected with this movement was 
the differentiation and development of separate State educa- 
tional departments, and this movement has in many States 
been attended with the downfall of the " district system " and 
the establishment of a quite thorough central control over 
such branches of educational administration as text-book 
supplies, courses of study, the examination and qualifica- 
tions of teachers, compulsory attendance and truancy. 

The first State to develop a permanent educational de- 
partment was New York, In 1812 this State created the 
office of " Superintendent of Common Schools." A little 
later there was a retrograde movement in this State. In 
1 82 1 the above office was abolished, and until 1854 the Sec- 
retary of State was made ex-officio State superintendent of 
schools. In 1 841, however, the office of deputy superin- 
tendent was created, and the duties of the Secretary 
were largely turned over to him. In 1854 the office of 



i5i] 



CENTRALIZATION IN EDUCATION 



superintendent was revived. In the meantime, eighteen 
other States had established similar offices, among the 
earliest of which were Vermont, Pennsylvania, Michigan, 
Massachusetts, Kentucky, Ohio, Missouri and Connecticut. 
For a time most of the States merged the office of superin- 
tendent of public instruction with some other office already 
established, and the former office was regarded as merely 
nominal. For example, Missouri, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Ver- 
mont and Louisiana, like New York, merged the office in 
that of the Secretary of State ; Colorado, in that of the State 
Treasurer; Oregon, in that of the Governor. Of course 
there was no logical or organic connection between the 
offices thus merged, and whatever development there was in 
the public school system under this regime was in spite of 
the fusion ; yet owing largely to political reasons, it proved 
very difficult to get the two offices permanently separated. 
But after a long and rather tedious development, there exists 
to-day a separate educational department in the administra- 
tive system of every State and Territory, except Alaska, 
headed in each case, except in Delaware, by a separate chief 
administrative officer. 1 In every State public education is 
looked upon as primarily a State affair subject to State regu- 
lation. 

Furthermore, this changed condition of educational ad- 
ministration has already found clear and emphatic expres- 
sion in the organic and statute law, and in the judicial 
decisions of nearly every State and Territory. The consti- 
tutions of all the States, except Delaware and New Hamp- 
shire, make it compulsory on the part of the legislature to 
provide a system of public schools, free to all children of 

1 In Oklahoma the superintendent of public instruction also acts as territorial 
auditor. In Maryland the principal of the State normal school is ex-officio 
superintendent of public instruction. The schools of Alaska are supervised by a 
resident general agent of the Bureau of Education. 



I0 CENTRALIZATION IN EDUCATION [152 

school age in the State. Most of the States have gone 
further, and provided in their organic law for State school 
funds the principal of which is not to be diminished, and the 
interest on which is pledged for the support of schools and 
forbidden to be used for any other purpose. Many of the 
State constitutions also make quite specific provision for 
central supervision by a State board or superintendent, or 
both. 1 The underlying doctrine of these constitutional pro- 
visions for education is that " knowledge and learning, as 
well as virtue, generally diffused throughout the community, 
are essential to the preservation of a free government and of 
the rights and liberties of the people." This principle, so 
early enunciated in the Massachusetts constitution, is found 
to-day, expressed in but slightly modified form, in at least 
fifteen of the State constitutions, and, as said above, is really 
the basis of all these provisions. 2 Several other lines of 
State control are laid down in the constitutional law of some 
of the States, as for example a minimum school year, the 
prohibition of sectarian instruction, the prohibition of grants 
of public money to sectarian schools, and compulsory edu- 
cation. 

It would seem, therefore, that State control is quite clearly 
asserted in the organic law of the States. We find also that 
the courts fully sustain the principle. The following extract 
from the opinion delivered in the case of State v. Haworth 3 
will serve as a typical expression of the opinion of the courts 

1 Const. Al., art. xiii, sec. 7; CaL, ix, 2; Col., ix, 1; Fla., xii, 2-3; Ga., viii, 
I; Id., ix, 2; Ind., viii, 8: la., ix, 1st, 1-10; Kan,,v'\, I and 9; La., art. 225 ; 
Mich., xiii, 1 and 9; Miss., viii, 2-4; Mo., xi, 4; Mont.,xi, II; Nev., xi, 1 and 7; 
N. C, ix, 8-12; Or., viii, I; S. C, x, 1: Tex., vii, 8; Fa., viii, 1-2; W. Va., 
xii, 2; Wis., x, I; Wy., vii, 14. 

2 Const. Ark., art. xiv, sec. 1; CaL, ix, I; Id., ix, I; htd., viii, 1; Me., viii; 
Mass., chap, v, sec. 2; Minn., viii, i; Mo., xi, 1; N. H., art. 83; N. C, ix, i; 
N. D., viii, I; Rh. I., xii, i; S. D., viii, 1; Tenn., xi, 12; Tex., vii, 1. 

8 122 Ind., p. 462. 



! 5 3 ] CENTRALIZA TION IN ED UCA Tl ON Y j 

regarding the present legal status of the schools in the dif- 
ferent States : " Essentially and intrinsically the schools in 
which are educated and trained the children who are to be- 
come the rulers of the commonwealth are matters of State 
and not of local jurisdiction. In such matters the State is 
a unit. . . . The authority over schools and school affairs is 
not necessarily a distributive one to be exercised by local 
instrumentalities ; but on the contrary it is a central power 
residing in the Legislature of the State. It is for the law- 
making power to determine whether the authority shall be 
exercised by a State board of education, or distributed to 
county, township, or city organizations throughout the State." 
In the Pennsylvania case of Ford vs. Kendall Borough School 
District the court went still further in its assertion of the 
power of legislature to centralize educational administration. 
The following brief extract from the opinion in this case will 
enable the reader to understand the doctrine of the court on 
this point : " We may assert positively and without hesita- 
tion that school districts are but agents of the commonwealth 
and are made quasi-corporations for the sole purpose of the 
administration of the commonwealth's system of public edu- 
cation." 1 

1 I2i Pa. St., 547. 



CHAPTER II 

THE RELATION OF STATE AID TO STATE CONTROL OF 
EDUCATION 

AMERICAN interest in popular education early took the 
tangible form of munificent State aid. As early as 1786 
New York set apart two lots in each township of the unoc- 
cupied lands of the State for " gospel and school purposes," 
and fifteen years later ordered that the net proceeds of one- 
half million acres of vacant and unappropriated lands should 
be devoted to the school fund. In 1795, when Connecticut 
sold the Western Reserve for one million dollars, she turned 
this sum into the school fund, which had been started as 
early as 1733 from the proceeds of the sales of lands in 
the northwestern part of the colony. Tennessee, in 1806, 
prompted by Congress, devoted one million acres of land 
each to colleges and academies, and one-thirty-sixth of the 
remaining unoccupied lands to common schools. Other 
States soon followed suit by starting school funds of various 
descriptions: Virginia and New Jersey in 18 10, South Car- 
olina in 181 1, Kentucky and New Hampshire in 1821, Maine 
about the same time, North Carolina in 1825, and Massachu- 
setts in 1834. 

But it is neither necessary nor profitable for present pur- 
poses to trace at all in detail the rise and development of 
these State school funds. Suffice to say that at present the 
principle of State aid to common school education is firmly 
established, every State in the Union adopting the principle 
either by setting apart special funds or by providing various 
12 [154 



! 5 5 ] CENTRALIZA TION IN ED UCA TION Y 3 

forms of taxation or appropriation for the same. It may be 
worth while, however, to note some of the almost endless 
varieties of State aid for education developed in the different 
States. The following are only part of the many species of 
funds and taxation for education : tax on banks, savings 
banks, trust companies, etc. ; tax on dogs and other animals ; 
tax on railroads; fines for intoxication and other offences 
against the State; licenses for auctioneers, brokers, circuses, 
liquors, taverns, restaurants, marriages, etc. ; percentage of 
fees of justices of the peace, prothonotaries, recorders of 
deeds, and other public officers ; poll taxes ; proceeds of the 
sales of public lands ; moneys arising from the lease of oyster 
lands ; proceeds of the sale of escheats, estrays, unclaimed 
dividends, etc. ; proceeds of tax sales; dividends on State 
Bank ; riparian rents and sales ; saline funds ; convicts' hire ; 
mill tax, etc., etc. The proceeds from the various funds 
and taxes are usually apportioned to the counties or towns 
by the State superintendents and paid out by the State 
treasurer (sometimes by the State auditor) on warrants 
issued by the apportioning authority. Sometimes, however, 
the apportionment is made by the State board of education, 
the school fund commissioners, the State treasurer or the 
State auditor. The usual basis of apportionment is the 
number of school children of school age, but sometimes the 
number of schools or teachers in the local area. 

But from the standpoint of the present chapter it is only 
important for us to note the bearing of State aid upon State 
control of education. The one naturally and necessarily led 
to the other. The granting of aid on the part of the State 
implied conditions upon which the aid should be received 
by the localities. These school funds and systems of taxa- 
tion were not established simply for the benefit of the locali- 
ties as such. Had this been the case the support of schools 
might have been left wholly to the localities. But the estab- 



l 4 CENTRALIZATION IN EDUCATION [ r ^6 

lishment of these funds is an evidence in itself of a dawning 
sense of the need of a State system of education under State 
supervision and control. These funds were established for 
the promotion of the public good in a wider sense. The 
State had interests of its own to foster, and a policy of its 
own to carry out. The establishment of State school funds, 
then, became the basis of a distinctive State policy, and inau- 
gurated a system of State control and intervention in the 
field of education. 

In the first place these State funds led to a better system 
of school returns, with all that this implies. Prior to the 
granting of regular State aid to the localities, it was all but 
impossible to get even the most meagre statistical returns 
from the same, because there was no adequate incentive for 
compliance and no effective penalty for refusal and neglect. 1 
Now, when the localities understand that their share of the 
State appropriation will be withheld in case of non-com- 
pliance with the statistical demands of the central depart- 
ment, it is needless to say that even very extensive and de- 
tailed statistics are quite readily obtained. The very great 
value and importance of such statistics in developing a real 
system of public education is too apparent to require further 
mention. 

But this vast fund of statistical information is not the only 
result of the granting of State aid to the schools, nor the 
only form of State control growing out of the same. It is 
primarily by the power of withholding appropriations from 
the localities that the State exerts its strong arm of control 
in other directions. It is the fear of losing their share of the 
State moneys that serves as the most effective method of in- 
ducing the localities to maintain schools during the entire 
period prescribed by law ; to provide instruction in all the 

1 The earliest school reports and still earlier sources of information abound with 
evidence of the careless neglect and indifference of the localities in this respect. 



I 5 7 ] CENTRALIZA TION IN ED UCA TION I g 

required branches of study; to employ only those teachers 
who conform to various requirements made by law and by 
the various school administrative authorities of the State ; 
to comply with numerous and important State regulations as 
to school property; in some cases to raise a certain required 
sum by local taxation ; in some cases to enforce compulsory 
attendance laws and factory legislation with reference to 
children ; in some cases to follow a State course of study, 
and to use text-books prescribed by the same authority; to 
carry out various rules of the State superintendent or State 
board too numerous to mention. 

It is very evident, therefore, that State aid to education 
has proven a condition precedent to any and all effective 
State control over the same. The one led necessarily but 
almost insensibly to the other. Without detailed treatment, 
then, I point to the establishment of State school funds and 
State systems of taxation for public education as the first 
important step taken in this country towards a centraliza- 
tion of school administration. 



CHAPTER III 

GENERAL OUTLINE OF PRESENT STATE EDUCATIONAL 
ADMINISTRATION 

The usual title given to the chief educational officer of the 
State is " Superintendent of Public Instruction." In some 
States, as in Georgia, Ohio and Rhode Island, he is called 
" State Commissioner of Schools ;" in some, as in Connecticut 
and Massachusetts, " Secretary of the State Board of Educa- 
tion;" in some, as in Alabama, Louisiana, South Carolina 
and Vermont, " State Superintendent of Education." A few 
other titles are in vogue. 

In the majority of the States this official is elected by the 
people, but in quite a number of cases he is an appointive 
officer. He is appointed by the governor, generally subject 
to confirmation by the Senate, in Maine, Minnesota, New 
Hampshire, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Tennessee, Arizona, 
Oklahoma and New Mexico ; by the State board of educa- 
tion in Connecticut and Massachusetts ; elected by the leg- 
islature in New York, Vermont and Virginia. The term of 
office of this official varies from one to four years in the 
different States, but the evident tendency is to lengthen the 
term. At least seventeen States x now prescribe a four years' 
term, and four States 2 a three year term. Several States, 
which have a shorter legal term, make a practice of frequent 
reflections. 

1 Cal., Fla., 111., Ky., La., Miss., Mo., Mont., Nev., N. C, Or., Pa., Va., W. Va., 
Wash., Utah, Wy. 

2 Me., N. J., N. Y., O. 

16 [158 



I c 9 J CENTRALIZA TION IN ED UCA TION l y 

The powers and duties of the State superintendent differ 
somewhat in the various States. The following are the most 
common functions assigned to him : to visit schools and 
consult with local officers and boards ; to prepare registers 
and various blank forms to be used by the school officers of 
the State ; to collect statistics concerning pupils, attendance, 
school taxes, etc., and receive reports from county superin- 
tendents, county examiners and various local boards; to 
report to the governor the condition of the public schools, 
the State normal schools and other educational institutions ; 
to apportion school revenues among the different localities 
and frequently act as secretary of the board of commission- 
ers of the school fund ; to grant and revoke State teachers' 
licenses; to recommend (and frequently to prescribe) text- 
books, library books, courses of study, and courses of read- 
ing for teachers ; to publish the school laws ; to decide 
appeals and points of school law, and publish his decisions ; 
to bring actions for recovering misapplied moneys, etc. ; to 
act ex-officio as trustee of normal schools, regent of the State 
university, etc. It is also worthy of notice here that the 
State superintendent in some cases exercises a rather im- 
portant appointing power. For example, in quite a number 
of States he appoints institute conductors and instructors. 
In Vermont and Alabama, he appoints the county superin- 
tendents ; in New York he appoints local boards for normal 
schools, can veto the appointment of normal school teachers, 
and can remove any school commissioner for neglect of 
duty; in West Virginia he appoints trustees of normal 
schools, commissions and removes county superintendents 
for cause ; in Pennsylvania he commissions county, borough 
and city superintendents, fills vacancies in the office of 
county superintendent, and appoints trustees for normal 
schools and examining committees for the same; in Ohio 
and Kentucky he appoints the State board of examiners ; in 



[8 CENTRALIZATION IN EDUCATION [ibo 

Michigan he appoints a State board of school visitors; in 
Tennessee he appoints agents in each county to visit schools. 
In some States he can revoke teachers' licenses for cause. 

Most of the States not only have a State superintendent 
but also a State board of education. 1 These boards are 
generally composed of some of the following State officials : 
governor, lieutenant-governor, secretary of State, State 
auditor, attorney-general, comptroller-general, surveyor-gen- 
eral, State treasurer, president of the senate, speaker of the 
assembly, and superintendent of public instruction. Some- 
times in addition to one or more of the above officials, the 
board is composed of persons appointed by the governor, 
as in Kansas, Louisiana, Maryland, Massachusetts, Montana, 
New Jersey, South Carolina, Tennessee, and Washington; 
appointed by the State superintendent, as in Nebraska and 
Texas ; elected by the legislature, as in Connecticut and 
Rhode Island ; or elected by the people, as in Michigan. 
In some States this board is mostly or entirely a professional 
body, embracing in addition to the governor and State 
superintendent, such persons as the presidents of the State 
university, normal schools, and agricultural college, and 
sometimes a few leading city superintendents. 2 

The functions of the State board differ quite widely in the 
various States. Most of these boards share with the State 
superintendent the exercise of part or all of the functions 
mentioned above as pertaining to the latter offictal. In 
addition to these functions, some of these boards, as we shall 
see, exercise an extensive control over text-books, courses 
of study, and the examination and licensing of teachers. 
Some are given the broad grant of power to "adopt rules 

1 All except Al., Ark, 111., la., Me., Minn., N. H., N. D., N. Y., O., Wis., Pa., 
Vt., S. D., Utah, Wy. Several of these States have boards for supervising the State 
Normal Schools. 

' l Eg., Cal., Ind., Kan., N. Mex., Ok., Utah. 



! 6 1 ] CENTRALIZA TION IN ED UCA T/OJV x g 

and regulations for the government of the public schools of 
the State." r The State board of Michigan, 2 Tennessee, 3 
Maryland, 4 Florida, 5 New Jersey, 6 and perhaps a few other 
States " controls " the State normal schools. Some of the 
State boards exercise an important appointing power. For 
example, the State board of Mississippi, 7 New Jersey and 
Virginia appoints county superintendents. The board of the 
latter State also appoints city superintendents and district 
trustees. The Louisiana board appoints parish boards of 
directors and in conjunction with the governor, 8 out of 20 
of the city board of New Orleans. The South Carolina board 
appoints county boards of examiners. The Florida board 
fills vacancies in county boards. As noted above, the State 
board in several cases appoints a secretary who virtually acts 
as State superintendent. In some cases also the power of 
suspension and removal is expressly conferred upon this 
board. The Florida board can remove any subordinate offi- 
cer for incompetency. The Virginia board can remove city 
superintendents and district trustees and " punish" county 
superintendents for neglect. The Mississippi board can sus- 
pend county superintendents for incompetency. The Mary- 
land board can suspend any examiner or teacher for gross 
neglect or inefficiency. In quite a number of the States this 
board can revoke teachers' licenses for cause. The most 
common and important functions, however, of this board are 
the examination of candidates for State teachers' licenses 
and the management of the State school funds. 8 Some 

1 Cf„ for example, the school law of Cal., Col., Ky., La., N. J.,N. C, Or., Miss., 
and a few other States. 2 Const. Mich., art. xiii, sec. 9. 

3 Code Tenn., 1884, art. ix, ch. 4. i Pub. Gen. Laws Md., ii, p. 1 183. 

5 Sch. Law, 1895, sec - J 8- * Sch. Law, 1895, p. 6. 

7 Appointed by the State Board in 14 cos.; elected by the people in the others. 
Sch. Laze, 1894, sec. 4258. 

8 Some States have a State board of examiners in addition to the State board of 
education. 



2 ( V-.'.N / A> - 1 / r/A '! IQ N IN ED UCA TION [ 1 62 

States which do not have the typical State board of educa- 
tion do have a corporate board solely for the control of the 
school funds. 1 A few other States have central boards with 
the sole function of examining and licensing teachers. 2 Min- 
nesota has a State high school board, which will be described 
in Chapter VII. 

It is interesting to note right here that the school law of 
Massachusetts and Connecticut specifically provides for 
State agents to be appointed by the State board. Connecti- 
cut has one such paid agent at present, who i-s empowered 
" to secure the due observance of the laws relating to the in- 
struction of children," but his main function is to enforce the 
compulsory attendance law. 3 Massachusetts has six paid 
State agents who do a great deal in the way of investigating 
local school matters, but do not seem as yet to exercise any 
very thorough control* 

Descending in the official scale, the next grade of adminis- 
trative officials is that of the county. All of the States out- 
side of New England, except Ohio and North Carolina, 5 have 
a county superintendent or county examiner in each county, 
and one State in New England, Vermont, has a county ex- 
aminer. The term of service of these officials varies from 
one to four years, with a preponderant majority in favor of 
a two-year term. In the majority of States these officials 
are elected by the people. In some States they are ap- 
pointed by the county board ; in some by the county court; 
in some by town superintendents or trustees ; in a few, as we 
have seen above, by the governor, State superintendent, or 
State board. 

The following are the usual functions of these officials: 
to visit periodically each school in the county, for the pur- 

1 Ark., N. D., W. Va., Wy. 2 la., O., N. Y., W. Va., Wis. 

3 Sch. Law, 1896, sees. 14, 15, 30, 35. 4 Sch. Law, 1892, p. 15. 

- This office was abolished in N. C. in 1895. 



1 63 1 CENTRALIZA 7 ION IN ED UCA TION 2 I 

pose of examining the discipline and mode of instruction in 
the same and noting the condition of school property ; to 
counsel teachers and local boards ; to hold teachers' insti- 
tutes ; to make reports to the State superintendent concern- 
ing the condition of the schools of the county; to apportion 
the school moneys to the districts and to withhold the same 
in certain cases ; to fix boundaries of districts in case of 
disagreement ; to condemn school-houses ; to examine candi- 
dates and grant certificates and frequently with power to re- 
voke the same for good cause ; to draw orders for school mon- 
eys ; to decide appeals on various local questions subject to 
final appeal to the State superintendent or other State author- 
ity; to appraise school -lands lying in the county; to act as 
chairman or secretary of the county board ; to appoint school 
officers and locate school-houses when districts fail to do so ; 
in some States to fill vacancies in district boards ; in some 
to prescribe the county text-books and course of study ; in a 
few cases to remove township or district officers for cause. 1 
All but eighteen of the States 2 also have a county board ap- 
pointed in various ways. 3 In some cases this board is 
simply a board of examiners, but in most cases it shares 
with the chief county school official most of the functions 
noted above. In quite a number of States the county board 
levies school taxes and in a few States employs the teachers 
of the county. 

It thus appears that these county superintendents and 
boards generally occupy about the same position with refer- 
ence to the schools of the county as the State superintendent 

1 For example, Al., Ind. 

2 All except Ark., Col., Del., Id., 111., la., Minn., Mont., Neb., N. J., N. Y., 
N. D., Pa., Tenn., Vt., W. Va., Wis., Wy. 

3 In a few cases appointed by the central authorities (the governor or State 
board); in some by the county board of supervisors; in a few by the county 
court or grand jury; in some by the county superintendent; in some cases they 
are elected by the people. 



CENTRALIZATION IX EDUCATION 



[I6 4 



and board do with reference to those of the entire State, 
subject, however, in a more or less tangible manner to the 
Stale authorities. The school law of many of the States de- 
clares specifically that these county officials arc subject to 
such rules and instructions as the State superintendent or 
State board may make, and frequently also directly com- 
mands them to carry the same into effect. 1 This subjection 
of local officials to State authority seems to be made quite 
effective by the fear of losing the State appropriation, also 
in some cases by central appointment of these officials, and 
still more so in a few cases by the power of suspension and 
removal granted to the central authorities. 

In New England the town school committees or super- 
visors occupy the same place with reference to the schools 
of the town as do the country authorities with reference to 
the schools of the county in the States just noted. In many 
States having the above county school organization there are 
township officials occupying an administrative position mid- 
way between that of the county and "district" authorities, 
and exercising in the township extensive powers of regula- 
tion with greatly varying degrees of subjection to county 
authority. The powers of " district" officials will be con- 
sidered in the next chapter. 

1 In some States the central educational department makes quite detailed and 
elaborate regulations for the localities concerning such subjects, for example, as 
length of daily sessions, hours for beginning and closing school, hours when teach- 
ers must be present, length of intermission, excuses for tardiness and absence, 
cleanliness of pupils, keeping of school registers, minimum passing grade for all 
local teachers' examinations, etc., etc. 



CHAPTER IV 

THE RISE AND FALL OF THE " DISTRICT SYSTEM" 

In 1789 the general court of Massachusetts enacted the 
following seemingly innocent and salutary law : "And 
whereas, by means of the dispersed situation of the inhabi- 
tants of the several towns and districts in this commonwealth, 
the children and youth cannot be collected in any one place 
for their instruction, and it has thence become expedient 
that the towns and districts, in the circumstances aforesaid, 
should be divided into separate districts for the purpose 
aforesaid. Be it therefore enacted," etc. 1 Fifty years later 
Horace Mann, commenting on this law, declared it to be 
"the most unfortunate law on the subject of common schools 
ever enacted in the State of Massachusetts. " 

Before considering the evil effects of the above law thus 
severely condemned, it may be well to note that its content 
was not really new : it simply legalized existing usages. 
During the 17th and 18th centuries, as the exigencies of 
rapid migration and settlement widely scattered many of the 
farming settlements, the people had hastily solved the new 
educational problems thus presented in a very primitive and 
crude manner, without calculating the consequences. As it 
became impossible for the children of the township to go to 
the school, the school went to the children. We therefore 
begin to frequently read of "moving schools." This process 
was often called in military fashion "squadroning out the 
schools." By a gradual transition small school-houses were 

' Act, 1789, chap.xix, sec. 2. 
J 65] 23 



24 CENTRALIZATION IN EDUCATION \ 166 

erected in the different " squadrons," and the towns became 
definitely divided into "districts," each district being allowed 
to draw its share of the school money and expend it in its 
own way. Thus by the middle of the 18th century the 
earlier " township system" practically ceased, and the era of 
the "district system" began. For more than fifty years, 
therefore, before the law of 1789, towns had been forming 
"districts." The importance of this law lies in the fact that 
by sanctioning, it greatly encouraged this splitting up of 
towns into districts, and the "district system" thus received 
a new impetus. And yet to be quite accurate we should 
note that no powers were conferred on the district by the 
law of 1789. The district was not made a corporation, and 
was not distinctly authorized to furnish school-houses, elect 
officers, contract with teachers, nor indeed to do any act 
whatever concerning the schools. Furthermore, not a single 
duty in regard to schools was imposed upon the district. 
Of course this state of affairs could not long continue, and in 
1 Soo the power to tax was conferred upon the people of the 
district. 1 The next step was to make school districts cor- 
porations with full power to sue and be sued, to make and 
enforce contracts, etc. This was done in 1817. 2 The final 
touch to this process of minute subdivision of power was 
given in 1827, when school districts were empowered to elect 
prudential committees, to whom were confided the care of 
school property and the important trust of selecting and 
contracting with teachers. 3 At last the school district has 
become a full-fledged political institution, and American 
sovereignty split up into the minutest conceivable fragments. 
Surely the principle of " local self-government" here reaches 
its most extreme and absurd development. And unfortu- 
nately the evil effects of the "district system" were not con- 

1 Laws of Mass., Feb. 28, 1800. 2 Ibid., June 13, 181 7. 

■• Ibid., Mar. 10, 1827. 



1 67] CENTRALIZA TION IN ED UCA TION 2 5 

fined to Massachusetts. The spirit of the law of 1789 and 
its sequels was altogether too much in harmony with the 
extreme American predilections of the time toward local 
self-government, to prevent it being rapidly transplanted 
into the other New England States, thence via New York 
into nearly all the other Northern States of the Union ; and 
this was mostly accomplished before the worst features of the 
" district system" had been demonstrated in Massachusetts 
or known outside of that State. This rapid adoption by 
other States, therefore, of the Massachusetts "district sys- 
tem" in the earlier part of this century marked the extreme 
limit of decentralization in American school administration. 
The latter half of the century, on the other hand, is witness- 
ing a very general undoing of this faulty early administrative 
development. I point to this very general downfall of the 
"district system" as one of the important and salutary ten- 
dencies towards centralization in American State school 
administration, which is characteristic of the times. 

What, then, to be more definite, is the " district system," 
and what are its attendant disadvantages and evils ? To what 
extent are they being recognized and avoided in the recent 
school administration of the different States? This is a term 
applied to a system under which a State becomes divided 
into nearly or quite as many independent units of school 
government as there are individual schools to be governed, 
except in cities and incorporated towns, where all the public 
schools of the community are generally under one manage- 
ment. Each "district" has its separate body of officials, in- 
trusted, to a greater or less extent, with the management of 
its school affairs. These officials, variously called " school 
committees," "school visitors," "school directors," "school 
trustees," "school boards," "school commissioners," etc., 
are generally elected by the voters of their respective dis- 
tricts, for terms varying in different States from one to fout 



2 6 CEA TRAUZATION IX EDUCATION h 68 

years. Their duties in the various Slates are quite similar, 
viz., the levying of local school taxes and expending of the 
same, the employment of teachers, the provision and main- 
tenance of school-houses and other school property, the 
selection of text-books and regulation of courses of study, 
and the general supervision of the school or schools of the 
district. Too often these officials have no qualifications 
whatever for these important duties, and are always com- 
paratively irresponsible in the performance of the same. 

It will aid us not only in trying to understand the evils of 
the " district system," but also in judging the extent to which 
these evils are now being recognized, to note the objections 
most frequently urged against it in the school reports of vari- 
ous States. The following are some of the most important 
evils of the system which I find quite generally recognized : 

(1) It fosters a very narrow provincialism, and is fatal to 
a broad and generous public spirit in school administration. 
The constituencies of the district officials are generally so- 
small as to represent little more than individual caprices and 
prejudices rather than real public sentiment or policy. The 
parsimony of the typical school directors has long since be- 
come proverbial. Speaking of this one writer very wittily, 
but quite correctly, says : " Questions involving the fate of 
nations have been decided with less expenditure of time, less 
stirring of passion, less vociferation of declamation and de- 
nunciation, than the location of a fifteen-by-twenty district 
school-house. ... I have known such a question to call for 
ten district meetings, scattered over two years, bringing 
down from mountain farms three miles away men who had 
no children to be schooled, and who had not taken the 
trouble to vote in a presidential election during the period." 1 
It thus appears that under the " district system " public sen- 
timent is very likely to be neutralized by private selfishness. 

1 G. H. Martin, The Evohition of the Mass. Public School System, pp. 93-4. 



I fig ] CENTRALIZA T10N IN ED UCA TION 2 J 

Average public sentiment has no real opportunity for vigor- 
ous action when the township is split up into ten or twenty 
infinitesimal political units. This extreme localization of 
administration inevitably tends to breed irresponsibility of 
the worst sort, and school offices are very apt to become 
mere perquisites used solely for selfish personal ends. 

(2) The "district system" is much more expensive in 
proportion to what it accomplishes than a more centralized 
system. By means of it hundreds of schools in every State 
in which it exists are kept in operation which really ought to 
be abandoned. The school reports are full of evidence to 
this effect. 1 It is not at all unusual to find from one to two 
hundred schools in a State in which the average attendance 
is less than ten pupils. 2 In the Massachusetts Report for 
1873 (p. 16) an instance is given where a school was taught 
some months for the solitary benefit of one scholar, at an 
expense of $60. The Pennsylvania Report for the same 
year (p. 135) instances a district in which the school was 
composed solely of members of one family. Cases nearly or 
quite as bad frequently occur under the " district system." 
The system evidently stands condemned on the ground of 
economy. 

(3) The "district system" enormously increases the 
number of officials. The following typical quotation well 
illustrates this point: " We have in Illinois in round num- 
bers 20,500 teachers, for whose employment and supervision 
34,602 directors — supposing that each district has but three 
— and 8,000 trustees and treasurers seem necessary, making 
in all 42,602 school officers. Counting the boards of educa- 
tion in districts with over 2,000 inhabitants, it is certainly 

1 Cf., for example, Mass. Sc/i. Rep., vol. 2, p. 30; N. J. Sch. Rep., 1894, appen- 
dix, p. ix. 

2 There were 3387 districts in New York having an average attendance of 10 
or less pupils during the school year 1894-5. 



28 CENTRALIZATION IX EDUCATION [170 

not too much to say that 4,300 school officers, or one-eight- 
ieth part of the population of the State, arc to be kept in 
office for the schooling of 750,000 children, or one school 
officer for every 20 children, and when we except the city of 
Chicago, one school officer for ever 15 children. 1 

(4) Closely connected with the above defect is the increase 
in the number of school elections which the " district system" 
begets. And no class of elections causes more feuds and 
animosities than school elections. The smaller the territory 
and the pettier the office, the greater are the enmities and 
strife engendered. 

(5) The " district system " occasions glaring and unjust 
inequalities in school taxation and school privileges. Un- 
questionably the intent of the school law of the various States 
is that school taxes and school privileges shall be uniform ; 
but even a cursory study of the State school reports reveals 
the most ridiculous inequalities in these respects, even in 
different parts of the very same township. In most of the 
States the principle of taxing the wealthier parts of the State 
for the benefit of the poorer is well established. The State 
school fund and the State school tax is apportioned to the 
various counties or towns according to some uniform plan, 
generally in proportion to the number of children of school 
age or the number of ratable polls ; but under the " district 
system " the principles comes far too short of effective ap- 
plication. Even as regards the further distribution of State 
moneys among the various districts, the poorer districts 
manifestly receive by far too small a share when the distribu- 
tion within the township is according to either of the above 
plans. 2 But this is not all of the inequality. The State tax 

' ///. Sch. Rep., 1885-6, p. ccxii. 

' l I have counted all told more than 30 plans of distribution within the township 
in the different States. The most usual plans besides those noted above are (1) 
the number of families; (2) the number of able-bodied persons over 21 years of 
age; (3) the number of houses; (4) equal amounts. 



I j i "1 CENTRALIZA TION IN ED UCA TION 2 $ 

is generally only a small part of the actual cost of the schools. 
Most of the money is raised by district taxation, and pre- 
cisely here is where the inequality presses most heavily. 1 
This leaving the poorer districts to shift for themselves gives 
rise to shockingly meagre school privileges in many cases. 
In almost any county or town in any State where the " dis- 
trict system " exists, there are some districts in which school 
is held only long enough to draw the State money. In fact 
this auction plan seems to be in high repute in some sections 
of the country, and consequently we frequently find that 
within the very same town one child can attend school only 
12 weeks, while another in a different district can attend 36 
weeks. Furthermore, in one district children are well taught, 
in another near by they are grievously mistaught; in one 
district they can sit in cheerful and healthful school-rooms, 
and have the advantages of good libraries and apparatus ; in 
another just the reverse is true. 

(6) The " district system " does not admit of any contin- 
uous and steady school policy. Committees are generally 
chosen for short periods, and the changes of teachers are 
correspondingly frequent and hap-hazard. Furthermore, 
committees are seldom elected because of their fitness or 
familiarity with present educational needs, but are in fact 
generally conspicuously unfit. The result is that school 
policy is spasmodic, and continuity is lost in the maelstrom 
of petty district politics. 

(7) It does not admit of any effective system of grading 
or classification. 

(8) It bars out all really effective supervision. 

(9) It fosters boundary quarrels. 

Such then are the principal weaknesses and defects of the 
extremely decentralized " district system." That they are 

1 It is not at all unusual to find one district paying 5 to 8 times the per capita 
tax of an adjoining district, and for about the same privileges. 



3Q CENTRALIZATION IN EDUCATION [ij 2 

now being very generally recognized and discussed is proven 
by the fact that the recent school reports of many States 
frequently refer to them and condemn the district system. 
And the defects of the system are not only being recognized 
quite generally, but are also being actually checked and 
overcome. Even in Massachusetts, the State where the 
system originated, attempts were early made to check and 
regulate its evil tendencies. As early as 1824 and 1826 1 
laws were passed in that State requiring every town to an- 
nually choose a school committee which should have a gen- 
eral supervision of all the town schools, and which could de- 
termine the text-books to be used and control the examining 
and licensing of teachers for the whole town. It was not 
long before the educational leaders began to despair of any 
effective regulation of the system, and began to work for its 
abolition. For many years the State board of education 
through its secretaries kept up a continuous fire against it, 
and as a result a permissive law was passed in 1853, 2 author- 
izing school committees to discontinue districts unless the 
tow r n voted triennially to continue them. This law was re- 
pealed in 1857. I n J 859 3 the "district system" was sum- 
marily abolished, but this law was also soon repealed. Ten 
years later, in 1869, the system was again abolished, but this 
law was practically repealed the very next year by allowing 
any town to reestablish the system by a two-thirds vote. 
Finally, however, in 1882, 4 the system was again abolished, 
and this compulsoiy law still remains unrepealed. 5 It thus 
appears that the " district system " died a hard death in 
Massachusetts, its native home. For many years, in many 
places, its abolition had been stoutly opposed as the entering 

1 Laws, Feb. 18, 1824, and Mar. 4, 1826. 2 Acts 1853, ch. 153. 

'•'Acts 1859, ch. 252. 4 Acts 1882, ch. 219. 

Only 45 towns were really affected by this law. All the rest had voluntarily 
abolished the system under the earlier permissive act. 



I j 3 ] CEN TEA LIZ A TION IN ED UCA TION 3 1 

wedge to centralization and despotism, and backwoods 
orators had for long eloquently appealed to the memories of 
Patrick Henry and the heroes of Lexington and Bunker Hill 
in its defense, but all their warnings and pleadings did not 
avail to keep this anomalous administrative monstrosity 
alive. 

In other States also the question of abolishing the " dis- 
trict system " has been almost constantly agitated for over 
half a century. As a result at least twenty-three States 1 
have already abolished the system in whole or in part, and 
bills looking to this end have been introduced into quite a 
number of other States during the present decade. These 
facts and a careful study of the State school reports and 
other sources shows that the almost unanimous verdict of 
those who have given this subject most careful study is 
uuqualifiedly against the decentralized "district system" 
and in favor of thorough and complete control by a higher 
body, sometimes the town, sometimes the county, sometimes 
the State. The " district system " is evidently doomed. 

1 Al., Ark., Ct.. Fla., Ind., la., La., Mass., Me., Minn., Miss., N. H., N. J., N. D., 
0., Pa., R. I., S. D.,Tenn.,Tex., Va., Vt., Wis. 



CHAPTER V 

COMPULSORY EDUCATION 

THE principle of compulsory education is by no means a 
new one in our country. Massachusetts and Connecticut 
were among the States of the world which earliest established 
education on a compulsory basis. Please note the following 
mandatory and somewhat paternal language of the good and 
famous law passed by the Massachusetts Bay colony in 
1642: " Be it ordered, that the selectmen of every town 

shall have a vigilant eye over their brethren and 

neighbors, to see, first, that none of them shall suffer so much 
barbarism in any of their families as not to endeavor to 
teach, by themselves or others, their children and apprentices 
so much learning as may enable them perfectly to read the 
English tongue, and knowledge of the capital laws." 1 This 
law also imposed what was then quite a heavy penalty for 
non-compliance with its provisions. The Connecticut code 
of 1650 contained very similar provisions. And the earlier 
judicial and municipal records show quite conclusively that 
these early statutes were by no means dead-letters in either 
colony. For many years they were quite rigidly enforced, but 
later legislation for various reasons relaxed. Then, early in 
the present century, when population began to rapidly cen- 
tralize, the evils of truancy became greatly aggravated; 2 and 
this fact brought about a new movement in the direction of 

1 Records of Mass., ii, p. 8. 

2 The first annual report of the Mass. board of education (p. 37) states that only 
\ of the children of school age in the State attended summer schools (short as 
they were), and only | attended winter schools. 

32 [174 



j 7 5 1 C EN TEA LIZ A TION IN ED V CA TION 3 3 

compulsion, which first came to a head in the Massachu- 
sets law of May 18, 1852, the first compulsory attendance 
law in the Union. 

It will be worth while to quote the language of this law 
because of its influence on legislation in other States. 
Section I. " Every person having under his control a child 
between the ages of eight and fourteen years, shall annually, 
during the continuance of his control, send such child to 
some public school in the city or town in which he resides 
at least twelve weeks, if the public schools of such city or 
town so long continue, six weeks of which time shall be con- 
secutive ; and for every neglect of such duty the party 
offending shall forfeit to the use of such city or town a sum 
not exceeding twenty dollars ; but if it appears upon the 
inquiry of the truant officers or school committee of any city 
or town, or upon the trial of any prosecution, that the party 
so neglecting was not able, by reason of poverty, to send 
such child to school, or to furnish him with the means of 
education, or that such child has been otherwise furnished 
with the means of education for a like period of time, or that 
his bodily or mental condition has been such as to prevent 
his attendance at school or application to study for the 
period required, the penalty before mentioned shall not be 
incurred." Section II. ''The truant officers and the school 
committees of the several cities and towns shall inquire into 
all cases of neglect of the duty prescribed in the previous 
section, and ascertain from the persons neglecting the rea- 
sons, if any, therefor ; and shall forthwith give notice of all 
violations, with the reasons, to the treasurer of the city or 
town ; and if such treasurer wilfully neglects or refuses to 
prosecute any person liable to the penalty provided for in 
the preceding section, he shall forfeit the sum of twenty 
dollars." 1 It is very evident that the above law contained 

1 Quoted from 24 Mass. Sch. Rep.^. 131. 



} j CENTRALIZATION IN EDUCATION r I7 (5 

too many exemptions and loop-holes for effective execution. 
It was a task far beyond the power of the average legal 
machinery to probe the psychology of offending town treas- 
urers, and prove their neglect to be "wilful!' It is not 
surprising, therefore, to learn that this early law remained a 
dead letter. For about two decades it was almost com- 
pletely ignored, even in the reports of the State board and 
its secretaries. Apparently public sentiment was not yet 
ripe for such a measure, and no attempt was made to en- 
force it. 

Although the law of 1852 was defective and remained a 
dead-letter, its passage was by no means unimportant. It 
was something to have the principle of compulsion recog- 
nized by law. About 1870 the State board began to 
urgently recommend the amendment of the law. This re- 
sulted in the act of 1873, 1 which cut down the age limit from 
8 to 14 years to 8 to 12 years, 2 but at the same time extended 
the annual compulsory period from 12 to 20 weeks. The 
most decided improvement, however, was in the provisions 
for enforcement. The old loop-hole of "$20 penalty for 
willful neglect" was omitted, and instead truant officers were 
required to prosecute for infractions of the law, "when so 
directed by the school committee!' Thus responsibility was no 
longer divided, but rested solely upon the school committee. 
And yet, as it turned out, school committees obeyed the law 
almost as reluctantly as the town treasurers, and in many 
cases truant officers were not even appointed. 3 On account 
of this latter neglect it was provided, in 1878, that their 
share of the income of the school fund should be withheld 
from towns not complying with the law of 1873. 4 If one 
could safely trust the reports of the town committees for 

1 Acts 1873, ch. 279. 2 The age limit was changed back to 8-14 years in 1874. 
'■' In 1875 truant officers had not been appointed in 211 out of the 341 towns in 
the State. Cf. t 39 Mass. Sch. Rep., p. 124. * Acts 1878, ch. 171. 



! 7 7 ] CENTRALIZA TION IN ED UCA TION 3 5 

1879, one would conclude that this penalty worked admir- 
ably, for in that year 214 towns reported the law " enforced." 
This sudden increase, however, is somewhat suspicious, and 
probably represents some exaggeration in the returns. 

But before considering the further changes in the Massa- 
chusetts compulsory law and its present operation, let us 
briefly summarize the provisions of the similar laws passed 
by other States and Territories since the above law of 1852. 
The following list gives the names of those States and Terri- 
tories which have thus far passed compulsory attendance 
laws, as well as the dates of the passage of the first law of 
such character: District of Columbia (1864), Vermont 
(1867), Michigan (1871), New Hampshire (1871), Wash- 
ington (1871), Connecticut (1872), New Mexico (1872), 
Nevada (1873), New York (1874), California (1874), Kan- 
sas (1874), Maine (1875), New Jersey ( 1875 ), Wyoming 
(1876), Ohio (1877), Wisconsin (1879), Montana (1883), 
Rhode Island (1883), Illinois (1883), Dakota (1883), 1 
Minnesota ( 1885), Nebraska (1887), Idaho (1887), Oregon 
( 1889), Colorado (1889), Utah (1890), Pennsylvania (1895) 
and Arizona (date not ascertained). The great majority of 
these States prescribe an annual compulsory attendance 
period of 12 weeks; some prescribe 14 weeks; others, 16 
weeks; a few, 20 weeks; one, 30 weeks; one, 36 weeks. 
The age limit during which attendance is made compulsory 
also varies somewhat. In some States it is 6 to 14 years; 
in some, 8 to 14 years; in some, 10 to 14 years; in some, 7 
to 16 years; in some, 8 to 16 years; in some, 7 to 12 years; 
in some, 7 to 1 5 years; in some, 9 to 15 years; in some, 8 
to 13 years. The usual penalties imposed for non-compli- 
ance with these laws are fines, which vary from one dollar to 
two hundred dollars for each offence. A few States inflict a 
short term of imprisonment. 

1 Both North and South Dakota since entering the Union have passed such laws. 



CEA TRAUZATIOX IX /■:/>( CI T/O.V 



['78 



It thus appears quite evident that there has been in recent 
years a growing tendency to adopt compulsory attendance 
laws in the different States and Territories. In all, thirty 
States and Territories have passed laws of this character 
since the Massachusetts law of 1852. Furthermore it is to 
be noted that many States which at first had very weak and 
indefinite laws have recently replaced them with more 
stringent ones and have provided more and more effective 
machinery for enforcing the same. 1 

On the other hand a close study of both the earlier and 
the later compulsory laws, as well as the various school re- 
ports, reveals the fact that in many States and Territories 
the principle of the right of the State to interfere with the 
affairs of Tie communities to the extent of compelling school 
attendance is as yet little more than a beautiful theory. 
Many of these States have with a loud hurrah caught up the 
cry for compulsory education and have spasmodically rushed 
into premature legislation on the subject, most of which has 
been defective in the extreme, either containing many loop- 
holes for evasion or else failing utterly to provide any definite 
or effective machinery for enforcement. Many of the States 
have provided so many exceptional cases in which attend- 
ance is not compulsory that the whole system has been thus 
thoroughly honeycombed ; others have nominally required 
towns to provide special truant officers for enforcing the law 
and yet have not provided any penalties for failing to do so ; 
still worse, in many cases, either no provision whatever has 
been made for enforcement or else the provision was so 

1 Later laws or amendments have been passed as follows: Vermont (1888), 
Michigan (1883, 1S85 and 1895), Washington (1883 and 1890), New York (1876 
and 1894), Maine (1887), New Jersey (1885), Wyoming (1887), Ohio (1889, 
1890, 1891 and 1892), Wisconsin (1882: in 1S89 tne so-called "Bennett Law" 
repealed in 1891, but replaced by a law containing nearly all of the Bennett law, 
except the obnoxious sec. 5), Rhode Island (1887), and Illinois (1889, the so- 
called " Force Act"). 



I ygl CENTRA LIZA TION IN ED UCA TION 3 7 

intangible as to be absolutely worthless. For example, 
many States have made prosecutions for neglect on the part 
of parents and guardians dependent upon the complaint of 
voters or tax-payers in the district. This is manifestly an 
absurdly inefficient provision and consigns the law in ad- 
vance to the dead-letter domain. So loose and defective in 
fact are many of these laws, especially the earlier ones, and 
so frequently are statements found in the State school reports 
and other sources to the effect that these laws are defective 
and not enforced, that there may have been some slight jus- 
tification for the following sweeping verdict of the Colorado 
State superintendent, made in 1877 : " Compulsory education 
in America is no longer an experiment. It is a well proven 
failure. ... If American experience has settled anything 
during the last ten years, it has established the fact that edu- 
cation can not be made compulsory in the United States." x 
But on the whole I think that the development in educa- 
tional administration during the past twenty years would go 
to prove the above radical statement entirely wrong and 
quite out of date. Several of the States, as I have said, have 
been marching right ahead, passing more and more stringent 
compulsory laws and coming nearer and nearer to a proper 
and effective system of administration of the same ; and there 
is very evidentiy a growing tendency in this direction in 
several other States. 2 The tendency is undoubtedly more 
and more towards State interference in this field. 

Undoubtedly the two States which have gone the farthest 
in this direction are Massachusetts and Connecticut. I 
have purposely reserved the consideration of the present 
condition and tendency of compulsion in these two States 

1 Col. Sch. Rep., 1877-8, pp. 2S-29. 

8 Quite encouraging reports, for example, have been received from Massachu- 
setts, Connecticut, New York, New Jersey, Ohio, Illinois, Maine, Rhode Island, 
and a few other States. 



j8 CENTRALIZATION IN EDUCATION [ x g 

for the last part of the present chapter. And we shall at 
once encounter two widely different systems of administra- 
tion of the same in these States. In his Report for 1888-89, 
(p. 470) the Commissioner of Education says: "In the two 
States, viz., Massachusetts and Connectiout, in which the 
compulsory attendance laws have been the most effective 
(though not the most elaborate or intricate), a tendency 
may be noticed towards two distinct types or systems : In 
Massachusetts, though the law is in its terms obligatory 
upon all towns, the system is practically a local-option one, 
and is administered by the towns. In Connecticut, on the 
other hand, a more centralized system has been developed, in 
which the State executes the' laws through its own agents, 
with the cooperation of the local authorities. It would seem 
that the latter method is more generally effective." 

Let us therefore examine the two systems and ascertain 
which is really the better and more effective, and which 
seems more certain of being permanent and of being copied 
by other States. First let us study the local system of 
Massachusetts. The prominent features of the present 
Massachusetts law are the following: 1 

1. Children between the ages of eight and fourteen years, 
and in towns affording opportunity for industrial education, 
children between the ages of eight and fifteen years, are re- 
quired to attend a public or approved private school (where 
instruction is given in the English language) for a period of 
30 weeks each school year, subject to an allowance of two 
weeks' time for absences. 

2. Persons having control of children of the above descrip- 
tion are held liable for the attendance of the same for the 
above period, and forfeit to school use the sum of $20 for 
each five days' absence of any such child in excess of two 
weeks' allowance. 

y Acts Mass., 1894, ch. 498. 



1 8 i I CENTRA LIZ A 7 'ION I A 7 ED UCA I EON 3 g 

3. If any such child has been otherwise instructed for a 
like period in the required branches or has already acquired 
said branches, or his physical or mental condition renders 
attendance inexpedient, then said liability is removed. 

4. Truant officers, appointed by the school committee of 
each town, are required to vigilantly inquire into all cases of 
neglect of the above duty, and, when so directed by the 
school committee, to prosecute the offender. Police, district 
and municipal courts, trial justices and judges of the probate 
court have jurisdiction. 

5. Provision is also made for dealing with habitual truants 
and incorrigible children. Chapter 508 regulates the em- 
ployment of children. 

We will now inquire concerning the operation and execu- 
tion of the above law. It might seem at first glance that a 
State like Massachusetts, which can show an average attend- 
ance of 92 per cent, of the children of all ages enrolled in 
the public schools, might be safe from criticism concerning 
the operation of its compulsory attendance law. But we 
should remember that this remaining fraction, though very 
small, may greatly menace the peace and prosperity of the 
Commonwealth. We must, therefore, look more definitely 
into the operation of the above law. In this we may be 
safely guided by the recent very careful investigation con- 
ducted by Mr. George A. Walton, Agent of the State Board 
of Education. 1 The investigation, embracing 50 representa- 
tive towns and cities selected from different parts of the 
State, shows that there must be 13,570 persons in the State 
who fail by reason of parental neglect to get the prescribed 
amount of schooling. 2 This is over 5 per cent, of the entire 
school population. Furthermore, it appears that in only 
seven cases have parents been brought into the courts on 
the charge of neglect, and six of these cases are reported 

1 Mass. Report, 1894-5, pp. 529-87. 2 Ibid., p. 535. 



VTJZALfZATfON /.V EDUCATION \_l%2 

from a single town. In some of the larger cities the law 
seems to be remarkably well enforced. This is chic to a 
higher public sentiment, and a well-organized local admin- 
istration of the law. 1 But the trouble lies in the fact that 
the law is very unequally enforced throughout the State. 
The following examples will illustrate the inequality : The 
average school population to one truant in truant schools 
wasin Fall River, 1,355 ; in Lawrence, 601 ; in Worcester, 
533; in New Bedford, 410; in Lynn, 303; in Lowell, 247. 
The report comments as follows on these examples: "With 
conditions in population and in schools so similar, the 
differences in the number sent to truant schools from 
different places can be accounted for only by referring 
them to the difference in the manner of executing the 
truant laws. That the laws are not well enforced will 
further appear if the ratio (488) of the number of the 
school children to one truant actually sent to the truant 
schools from the cities cited be compared with the num- 
ber of truants found in the 50 places investigated. We 
discovered 125 truants in the investigated school population 
of 26,968 children. This means 1 truant to every 216 chil- 
dren, a ratio in striking contrast with that of 1 to 488. Ap- 
plying the ratio deduced from the investigation, 1 to 216, to 
the above cities, it appears that less than 45 per cent, of the 
truants of these cities are committed to truant schools." 2 
These few extracts from the Report prove that the Massa- 
chusetts law is by no means generally well enforced (though 
by far better than in any other State except Connecticut). 
We next inquire, Why not? Without attempting to enumer- 
ate the different reasons, it is sufficient to state that the one 
most important reason is that enforcement is left wholly to 

*For example, in Boston there are 17 truant officers, including one chief; and in 
Cambridge 4. 

% Mass. Sch. Report, 1894-5, p. 539. 



I 8 3 ] CENTRALIZA TION IN ED UCA TION 4 j 

local officers. In the language of the report, "local officers 
are too closely related to the offenders against these laws to 
make such officers the best persons that can be found to 
execute the laws." 2 In recommending alterations in the law 
and its administration, the Report still more bluntly confesses 
the weakness of the local system, and advises centralization, 
as follows : "-It is a well-understood fact, that in a large 
population, as in a city, officers, appointees of the govern- 
ment, treat cases which we are considering with more inde- 
pendence than is likely to be exercised in smaller places, 
where an officer is liable to be influenced by his neighbors. 
Without taking from the law any of the provisions now be- 
longing to towns and school committees concerning local 
truant officers, it would seem to be wise to make provision 
in it for one or more State school attendance officers. They 
should supplement the local truant officers, and be possessed 
of all the powers throughout the State conferred by law upon 
these officers, and be responsible to the State board of edu- 
cation. In the investigation carried on in fifty towns and 
cities, the remedy suggested by superintendents and com- 
mittees for the neglect to enforce the laws is the appointment 
of a State officer, with power to make presentments of cases 
charging parental neglect, truancy and disobedience to the 
reasonable rules of the schools. Connecticut, employing 
such an officer, has had marked success in enforcing the 
compulsory laws of that State. . . . Upon the enforcement 
of the compulsory law on a few parents in different parts of 
the State, other parents would take warning, and a percep- 
tible decrease would take place in the number of absences on 
account of parental indifference and neglect, and there would 
be a consequent improvement in the regularity of attendance. 
.... It is in towns where there is not a proper public sen- 
timent demanding the effective enforcement of the laws that 

1 Mass. Sch. Report, 1894-5, p. 540. 2 Ibid., 542. 



4 2 CENTRALIZATION IN EDUCATION [^4 

such an officer would do his best work. He would create a 
public sentiment in favor of the law by the good effects 
which would soon be evident. 1 More than once before this 
the Massachusetts Reports have cited the example of Con- 
necticut and urged greater centralization. 2 

It appears, therefore, from the foregoing that while the 
principle of compulsory education has taken a very deep 
hold on public sentiment in Massachusetts, and while the 
law relating thereto is being well enforced in many parts of 
the State, still the law is very unequally executed throughout 
the State, owing to absence of a strong central administra- 
tion of the same; (2) that the defects of the local system of 
administration are being recognized, and a centralized ad- 
ministration of the laws is more and more becoming to be 
recognized not only as innocent and safe, but salutary and 
necessary. Perhaps it is not too much to predict that in the 
near future Massachusetts will wisely follow the lead of Con- 
necticut, and turn in practice from the " local option " 
system to a " centralized " system. 

It is interesting to turn to a brief consideration of the 
compulsory system of Connecticut, which State has from the 
start set the example for Americans of a system of adminis- 
tration in this field which is at once rational and effective. 
The vital part of the Connecticut compulsory law is con- 
tained in the following language : " All parents and those 
who have the care of children shall bring them up in some 
honest and lawful calling or employment, and instruct them 
or cause them to be instructed in reading, spelling, writing, 
English grammar, geography and arithmetic. And every 
parent or other person having control of any child over 
eight and under sixteen years of age, whose physical or 
mental condition is not such as to render its instruction in- 

1 Mass. Sch. Report, 1894-5, pp. 567-8. 

2 Cf., for example, vol. 1, p. 184; vol. lii, p. 235; vol. liv, p. 113. 



I 8 5 ] CENTRALIZA TION IN ED UCA TION 43 

expedient or impracticable, shall cause such child to attend 
a public day school regularly during the hours and terms 
while the public schools in the district wherein such child 
resides are in session, or elsewhere, to receive thorough in- 
struction during said hours and terms in the studies taught 
in said public schools. But children over fourteen years of 
age shall not be subject to the requirements of this section 
while lawfully employed to labor at home or elsewhere." x 
Section 29 fixes a penalty not to exceed five dollars fine for 
each week's failure to comply with the above. Penalty is 
not incurred, however, when the child is destitute of clothing 
suitable for attending school and the parent is unable to 
provide the same, or when the mental or physical condition 
of the child renders such instruction impracticable. Sec. 
40 requires towns to appoint truant officers. The language 
of the law is singularly clear and specific throughout and 
difficult of evasion. But the most important and character- 
istic feature of the Connecticut law is its system of execu- 
tion. The significant language of the law concerning this is 
as follows : " The State board of education may appoint 
agents, under its supervision and control, for terms of not 
more than one year, who shall be paid not to exceed $5 per 
day for time actually employed, and necessary expenses, and 
whose accounts shall be approved by said board and 
audited by the comptroller. The agents so appointed may be 
directed by said board to enforce the provisions of the law re- 
quiring the attendance of children in school, a7id to perform 
any duties necessary or proper for the due execution of the du- 
ties and powers of the board!' 2 

Here then we have a thoroughly centralized system of ad- 
ministration for the compulsory law T — a very definite law, 
definite local officials subject to the direction of a central 
machinery . We have seen this system cited by way of con- 
1 Sch. law, 1896, sec. 28. ' l Ibid., sec, 15. 



44 VTRAUZATION IN EDUCATION \\%6 

trast with the Massachusetts system. Let us sec directly 
how compulsory education has operated in Connecticut 
under this system of administration, which has practically 
existed ever since the passace of the Act of 1872. Perhaps 
we can show the workings of the system in no better manner 
than by making a few quotations from the State Reports 
from 1872 to the present time. As early as 1873 we find 
the following statement: " The law is generally approved 
and I learn of no opposition to it. . . . It is certainly in- 
creasing the attendance in many places." 1 In the report for 
1875 (p. 27) we find the following statement: "In Connec- 
ticut public sentiment is steadily growing in favor of the 
legal prevention of illiteracy. Stringent as are our laws on 
this sublect, they have awakened no public opposition. . . . 
A few parents — I have not heard of a dozen in all — openly 
defied the law, but as soon as they found that the law was 
imperative and that legal complaints were made out against 
them, they were glad to stay proceedings by compliance 
with its provisions." The same report (p. 29) contains the 
following important direct allusion to the work of the State 
Agent: "A journey of the Agent or Secretary to the re- 
motest district of the State would be amply compensated by 
the addition of a single child to the regular attendance at 
school. For the very purpose of increasing the attendance, 
the Agent is now chiefly occupied in visiting schools, school 
officers, and in some cases parents." We get a good idea of 
the efficiency of the centralized administration of the law 
from the number of prosecutions. There were nine prosecu- 
tions of employers between 1875 and 1886, and fifty-two 
prosecutions of parents and guardians during the same years. 1 
Mr. Giles Potter, who has been the State Agent ever since 
the adoption of the law, says " there have been prosecutions 
of parents or employers every year since 1878. But 
1 Sch. Rep., 1873, p. 140. 



I 8 7 1 CENTRA LIZA I TON IA EDU CA TIOA ' 4 



constant efforts have been made to secure the due observance 

of these laws by other means. ... In enforcing these laws, 
much has been done by school visitors and other local 
officers by cooperating with the agent of the State Board.'" 2 
In 1S87 there were six prosecutions of employers and thirty 
prosecutions of parents and guardians. Concerning this 
unusually large number of prosecutions Mr. Potter says : " I 
have endeavored to follow up more thoroughly than formerly 
cases where it had been found that there had been criminal 
neglect on the part of parents and others having control of 
children. In doing this a much larger number of parents 
have been prosecuted . . . than in any former year." 3 In 
18S9 there were seven prosecutions of employers and twenty- 
nine prosecutions of parents. In this year 764 children 
illegally absent were sent to school. In 1894 there was 
a total of twenty-two prosecutions. Concerning these prose- 
cutions in general Mr. Potter says : " Prosecutions of parents 
and others having control of children have been made only 
in cases where there has been continued neglect of the chil- 
dren and defiance of law. It is not pleasant to resort to 
such means, but it is doubtless well that some do make 
themselves objects for the enforcement of the law and exam- 
ples of what the law can do.''' 1 He further comments as 
follows : " There is evidently an increasing tendency to re- 
gard violators of these school laws as deserving punishment 
quite as much as those who do violate any other criminal 
statutes." 2 It is very doubtful if such a sentiment could have 
been created under any mere local option system. 

It is very interesting to note the change in public senti- 
ment in Connecticut during the past twenty-five years re- 
garding compulsory education, as developed by this thor- 
oughly business-like and centralized system of administration, 

1 Sen Ret. 1886,. p. 48. 2 Ibid., pp. 4S-9. ' 6 Ibid., 1SS8, p. 52. 
k lbid., 1896, p. 34. '"Ibid, iSSS, p. 35. 



.jo CENTRALIZATION IN EDUCATION ["188 

especially as contrasted with all the other States in which a 
merely local and ineffective executive machinery has been 
established. At first twelve weeks' attendance each year was 
all that could be exacted, and that somewhat reluctantly; 
now thirty-six weeks are required in every district in the 
State. At first the age limit was eight to fourteen years ; 
now it is eight to sixteen years. At first the people were 
opposed to the system, and cried out against what was 
thought to be excessive centralization ; now they send in 
numerous requests from all parts of the State each year for 
the services of these same agents of the central board. In 
short, everything goes to show that the system is working 
admirably. 

And what has proven true in Connecticut probably might 
and perhaps will prove true in other States of the Union. 
When compulsory education, even in its dilutest form, was 
first agitated in this country, it was everywhere declared to 
be unsuited to the "genius" of the people; "the first step 
towards centralization," " opposed to the spirit of American 
institutions," and other like shocking epithets were hurled 
at it from every quarter. But as the Commissioner of Edu- 
cation says: "The arguments and discussions of 30 years or 
more have been gradually silencing opposition, and public 
sentiment is slowly crystallizing in the direction of requiring 
by law all parents to provide a certain minimum of school 
instruction for their children. This tendency is unmistak- 
able." 1 Facts indicate very plainly that Americans are 
getting over their proverbial fear of such phrases as the 
above, and are being converted to compulsory education by 
its evident practicability. It is no longer deemed sufficient 
in a free public school system like ours to simply give every 
child an opportunity to acquire an elementary education, 
but the very safety of the State imperatively demands the 
1 Com. Educ. Rep., 1888-89, P- 47°- 



! 8 9 1 CEN TRALIZA TION IN ED UCA TION 4 7 

certain securing of this great essential of good citizenship to 
every child. 

Furthermore it is noticeable that our State officials are no 
longer afraid to quote favorably European precedents and 
models in educational administration. For example, as 
early as 1872, State superintendent Bateman of Illinois said: 
" It has been proved that the intervention of the legislature, 
by means of compulsion, is necessary to perfect the Ameri- 
can school system — that such intervention is not unconsti- 
tutional or tyrannical ; that the allegations as to the in- 
compatibility of such laws with the nature and spirit of our 
political system are unfounded, as also are the apprehensions 
concerning the assumed harshness and severity of their en- 
forcement ; that the operation of such laws in many of the 
most enlightened States of Europe is a vindication of their 
wisdom and beneficence, affording an example that may be 
safely followed!' 1 - Three years later, the State superintend- 
ent of California uttered the following pungent truth con- 
cerning this point: "There can be nothing «;*- American in 
adopting non- American means to eradicate non- American 
evils which refuse to yield to American means." 2 And since 
the above comments were made, one finds in the various 
State reports very many references to the more effective 
centralized administration of European countries, and of 
Connecticut, in the line of compulsory education, as some- 
thing desirable for other American States to copy. What is 
indeed wanted in America to make compulsory education 
thoroughly successful, is a strong administrative department 
at the head of the system in each State. Connecticut, one 
of the earliest and staunchest upholders of local self- 
government, has taken the lead in asserting that, in this one 
realm at least, this time-honored and hoary principle must 
be supplemented by efficient State control; and while many 

1 III. Sch. Rep., 1872, p. 187. 2 Cal. Sch. Rep., 1874-75, p. 35. 



48 < V-'.V / A'. ILIZATION IN EDUCA TION \\Q>0 

States still lag and none have come up to the standard set 
by Connecticut, a few are following close in her tracks, and 
the tendency is already quite strong in the direction of a wise 
centralization of administration in this realm. 1 

1 It may be well to also note here that the State superintendent of New York is 
authorized " to employ such assistants as he may deem necessary " to enfoxxe the 
compulsory attendance law of that State. Cf., Act 1894, sec. 10. 



CHAPTER VI 

STATE REGULATION OF TEXT-BOOKS 

DURING the past twenty-five years a great many laws have 
been passed by the various States and Territories regulating 
the selection, adoption and supply of school text-books. A 
brief examination of these laws will, I think, prove interest- 
ing and profitable, as they reveal another strong tendency 
towards centralization in educational administration. Let us 
examine these laws with reference to the following three 
subjects : 

A. The various kinds of uniformity established. 

B. The various periods of use prescribed. 

C. The various systems of supply. 

(A) A very few of the States and Territories have no 
laws whatever on the subject of text-book uniformity. 
Many of the States have as yet only made district uniformity 
compulsory. 1 In a few of these States, however, the State 
superintendent is authorized to recommend text-books for 
uniform adoption. 2 Several States go one step further and 
make township uniformity compulsory ? The next stage of 
centralization would naturally be county uniformity, and at 
least seven States have made this system compulsory* 
Furthermore two other States have passed permissive county 
uniformity laws. 5 New Jersey has a system which is a cross 

1 Ark., Col., 111., la., Kan., Mich., Neb., N. Y., N. D., S. D., O., Pa., Term., Wis., 

2 Wisconsin and Arkansas. In the latter State the attorney general has held 
that district directors in adopting text-books are confined to the list prepared by 
the State superintendent. 8 Mass., Me., Ct., N. H., R. I. 

* Fla., Ga., Ky., Md., Miss., Vt., N. C. 6 la., Kan. 

191] 49 



JO CENTRALIZATION TN EDUCATION [ IO/2 

between district and county uniformity. In this State dis- 
trict boards " in connection with the county superintendent" 
prescribe text-books for the schools under their charge. In 
Tennessee, county superintendents recommend text-books 
" with a view to securing " county uniformity. At least six- 
teen States and Territories x have gone to the extreme of 
centralization in the direction of text-book uniformity by es- 
tablishing a system of compulsory State uniformity under 
the control of the central educational authorities. The 
Kentucky State board of education recommends lists of text- 
books from which county superintendents must select. The 
school law of Connecticut - empowers the State board of ed- 
ucation to prescribe text-books for the State, but the power 
has never been exercised. Several of the States which have 
not established a general system of State uniformity have 
prescribed a text-book in physiology and hygiene for use in 
all the schools of the respective States. Some of the above 
States impose the penalty of forfeiture of their share of the 
school fund upon all localities not complying with the above 
laws. 

(B) The majority of the States have asserted the princi- 
ple of State control over the local authorities by prescribing 
a period during which text-books cannot be changed. This 
period is three years in Arkansas, North Carolina, Pennsyl- 
vania, Rhode Island and Wisconsin ; four years in California, 
Colorado, Idaho, Illinois, Louisiana and Virginia; five years 
in Connecticut, Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Iowa, Kansas, 
Kentucky, Maine, Michigan, Missouri, Mississippi, Nebraska, 
New Hampshire, New York, South Carolina, Vermont and 
Washington ; six years in Indiana, Montana and Oregon. 
The Minnesota law of 1877 prescribed a period of 15 years; 

1 Ariz., Gal., Del., Id , Inch, La,, Mo., Mont., Nev., Or., S. C, Utah, Va., Wash., 
W. Va., Wy. 

2 Sch. law, 1896, sec. 13. 



I g 3 ] CENTRAHZA TION IN ED UCA TIOX - I 

the law of 1893 a period not less than 3 nor more than 5 
years. 

(C) Several systems of supplying text-books to pupils 
are prevalent in the various States, the most important of 
which are the following : 

/. Individual purchase in an open market. This plan, 
which implies no State control whatever, is perhaps as yet 
the most common one. It is established in at least fifteen 
States. 1 

II. Contract system. Under this system either the State 
or the local authorities, by means of contracts with the pub- 
lishers, regulate or control the wholesale or retail price of 
text-books, or both. Such contracts are made by county 
authorities in live States; 2 by State authorities in twelve 
States. 3 The general practice under the State contract 
system is for publishers to make bids for furnishing all the 
schools of the State with one or more of the State series of 
text-books, and for the State board of education to decide 
which proposition it will accept. In Montana and West 
Virginia the prices of text-books are directly fixed by law; 
in Ohio by the so-called ''School-book board. 1 ' 

It is interesting to here allude to the complicated and 
highly centralized State contract system established by the 
Minnesota law of 1877. Although this law has now been 
repealed, it illustrates most admirably the fact that the prin- 
ciple of ''local self-government" is sometimes cast com- 
pletely to the winds and the most extreme centralization 
adopted in order to achieve some much desired end. Under 
this Minnesota law the State entered into a 15-year contract 
with Mr. D. D. Merrill to furnish a series of text-books for the 

1 Ai., Ark., Col., Ct. (except in towns and districts having the free text-book 
system), Ga., 111., Ky., Mich., N. J., N. Y., N. D., S. D., S. C.,Tenn., Tex. 
8 Kan., Md., Miss., X. C, Vt. 
s Id.. Ind., la., Mo., Mont., Xev., 0., Or., Va.. Wash., W. Va., Wy. 



5 2 t ENTRAUZA TION IN EDUCA TION [ x 94 

schools of the State. The State fixed the standard of quality 
and the maximum price of said books. The law was to be 
executed by school districts under penalty of forfeiture of 
their share of the State school moneys. 

It seems that the various plans of State uniformity and 
State contract have attracted considerable criticism in dif- 
ferent parts of the country. The following stinging denun- 
ciation by Supt. A. P. Marble, now of New York, may per- 
haps be taken as a sample of the kind of criticism and oppo- 
sition aroused : " These attempts at State interference with 
that which does not belong to the State have not been suc- 
sessful. . . . They are contrary to the genius of our institu- 
tions. . . . State decree is usurpation. . . . State contract, 
the next step towards Russia, is a further usurpation ; it 
perverts the functions of the State from government to busi- 
ness, from making laws for the general good to selling 
school books, with a purpose, by no means accomplished 
with any certainty, of saving a few cents yearly to the indi- 
vidual citizen." 1 I have no desire or intention to attempt to 
discuss the merits of State uniformity and State contract or 
to refute the objections raised. Certainly it is true that this 
system is a long step towards centralization ; but I simply 
accept the actual conditions as facts showing a tendency in 
this direction, whether salutary or otherwise. It is only fair, 
however, for me to briefly quote from the opinion of repre- 
sentative officials in the States which have actually tried 
these more centralized systems. We may then be better 
able to judge of the real strength and probable durability of 
this tendency. The State superintendent of Louisiana in 
1889 said : " To date, so far, the scheme to secure uniformity 
in the use of books at reduced prices has proven unsatisfac- 
tory to those upon whom devolve the expenses of purchas- 
ing them." 2 The West Virginia superintendent said in 
1 Com. Educ. Rep., 1888-9, p. 575. 2 Z«. Sch. Rep., 1888-9, P- 3- 



I g 5 ] CENTRALIZA TION IX ED UCA TION 5 3 

1890: "Since 1879 the State has by law contracted through 
the State superintendent for all public school-books and 
fixed the maximum price at which these books shall be pur- 
chased from the publisher and sold by the retail dealers 
throughout the State. This system gives our people uniform 
books at uniform prices. This system just described is at 
the present time in operation in this State, and in my judg- 
ment gives very reasonable satisfaction. The obstacles in 
the way of making it entirely satisfactory are that in remote 
sections of the State the per cent, of profit to the retail 
dealers does not offer sufficient inducement to handle the 
books, and so the people do not always find a convenient 
supply at hand. When these obstacles are removed and 
some other changes made, I believe our system will render 
almost entire satisfaction." 1 The Montana superintendent 
wrote in the same year : " I believe in a uniform series of 
books for use in the State, as children are continually chang- 
ing residence, and the expense of books for use in the public 
schools is reduced to a minimum. . . . Our present series 
meets as a whole with popular approval." 2 The same year 
the Oregon superintendent said: "This system is satisfactory 
to the people generally, so far as I know; "3 and the Wash- 
ington superintendent said : " The law requiring uniform text- 
books has given very general satisfaction, so much so that 
our legislature, which has just adjourned, readopted it as a 
part of our State code, ... I think no better system could 
be adopted for our use than the one referred to." 4 In 1894 
the Idaho superintendent said: "The State is to be con- 
gratulated upon the success of the system, not only in the 
increased efficiency of her schools, but in the great saving of 
expense in the purchase of books." 5 A similar verdict was 
rendered in 1890 by the Nevada superintendent. 6 

1 yth Bien. Tex. Sch. Rep., p. xlii. 2 Ibid., p. xxxv. 3 Ibid., xxxviii. 4 Ibid., p. xlii. 
5 Id. Sch. Rep., 1S93-94, p. 22. 6 ythBien. Tex. Sch. Rep., p. xxxvi. 



54 CENTRALIZATION IN EDUCATION [ K j)6 

Without citing further expressions of opinion, I will simply 
say, on the other hand, that in judging this question due 
weight must be given to the fact that Minnesota, after a long 
trial, and North Carolina, after a short trial, have both abol- 
ished the system of State contract. But in judging the 
general tendency in this direction, we must also remember 
that Indiana, which has one of the best school systems in the 
country, established a system of State contract in 1889; 
Missouri, in 1891 ; and Idaho, in 1893. Friends of the sys- 
tem seem to be raised up more rapidly than its enemies. 
Furthermore, it may not be amiss to say that the system re- 
cently abolished in Minnesota was not the typical State con- 
tract system, and contained some special features which were 
objectionable in themselves, but not necessarily condemna- 
tory of the general system. As far as concerns the abolition 
of the State contract system in North Carolina, it is known 
that this was done by a Legislature which was proverbially 
ruthless in its treatment of the existing school law of the 
State, and this in face of strong opposition by prominent 
educators and officials of the State. 1 

It may also aid us in judging of the strength of this ten- 
dency towards centralization to glance at the legal and con- 
stitutional phase of the question. Of course, the enemies of 
State uniformity and State contract have frequently contested 
its constitutionality, but it would seem that they have been 
clearly defeated on this phase of the question. The follow- 
ing quotation, from the opinion in the Indiana case of State 
vs. Haworth? may be taken as a type of the opinions ren- 
dered on the same or similar questions in several States : " It 
is impossible to conceive of a uniform system of common 
schools without power lodged somewhere to make it uni- 
form ; and, even in the absence of express constitutional 
provisions, that power must lie in the legislature. If it does 

1 N. Car. Rep., I&93~<J4, p. 34. 2 122 In&, 462. 



197] CENTRA LIZA TIOA T IN ED U CA 1 ION g 5 

reside there, then that body must have, as an incident of the 
principal power, the authority to prescribe the course of 
study and the system of instruction that shall be pursued and 
adopted, as well as the books which shall be used. . . . Hav- 
ing this authority, the legislature may not only prescribe 
regulations for using such books, but it may, also, declare 
how the books shall be obtained and distributed. If it may 
do this, then it may provide that they shall be obtained 
through the medium of a contract awarded to the lowest 
bidder. . . . The statute is not within the constitutional pro- 
visions directed against monopolies. . . . The object of the 
act is to secure books for the public schools, by means of 
open competition after full notice." 1 In a similar opinion 
the Supreme Court of Minnesota, in the case of Currier vs. 
Merrill, held that the State could compel the patrons of the 
schools to buy the books from its officers ; and the Supreme 
Court of California held, in the case of the People vs. State 
Board of Education, that the decisions of the State board as 
to text-books were final, and must be obeyed by all local 
boards and officers. It seems quite clear, from the cases 
cited, that this form of centralization is already recognized in 
our jurisprudence and upheld by our courts as constitutional, 
in spite of the strong American predilections towards local 
self-government. 

Furthermore, while one can easily find in some States 
which have not adopted any such centralized system many 
expressions of holy horror over the desecration of American 
institutions and departure from the straight and narrow path 
of local self-government, one notes that these objections have 
weighed very lightly in those States which have made up 

1 The same general doctrine has been distinctly asserted in other cases, e. g., 
State v. Hawkins, 44 Ohio St., 98; Ctirrier v. Merrill, 25 Minn., i; Bancroft 
v. Thayer, $ Sawyer, 502 (Oregon); State v. Stale Bd, Educ, 18 Nev., 1 73; 
People v. State Bd. Educ, 49 Cal., 684. 



5 6 CBN 7 "A\ / /. IZA TION IN ED UCA TION [ \ 98 

their minds that this form of centralization is wise and ex- 
pedient. It seems fair to conclude, therefore, that whatever 
may be the merits or demerits of State uniformity and State 
control, there is as a matter of fact quite a decided tendency 
towards this form of centralization, and seemingly this 
tendency is increasing rather than waning. 

III. Free Text-Book System. Under this system text- 
books are purchased by the district, township or county and 
loaned to the pupils free of charge, subject to such rules and 
regulations as the authorities may prescribe. The following 
States have practiced State interference to the extent of 
making this system of supply compulsory : Delaware, Idaho, 
Maine, Massachusetts, Nebraska, New Jersey, New Hamp- 
shire and Pennsylvania. Permissive laws authorizing local 
authorities to adopt this system have been passed in at least 
all of the following States : Colorado, Connecticut, Michi- 
gan, Minnesota, North Dakota, Vermont and Wisconsin. 
Since 1888 the county boards in Maryland have been au- 
thorized to sell, rent or furnish text-books free, at their own 
option. Text-books are also furnished free in a number of 
cities, towns and districts in New York and Rhode Island. 
Quite a number of other States require local authorities to 
furnish free text-books to indigent children, and still others 
authorize this. 

From the foregoing brief statement it is evident that there 
is a very strong tendency in the eastern section of the coun- 
try tov/ard this system of free text-books, and also a slight 
tendency in the West in the same direction. Six eastern 
States and two western States have thus far made this system 
compulsory ; and there are at least five other eastern States 
and five other central and western States in which this 
system is either practiced or authorized by law. It is fair to 
infer, I think, that the permissive laws in the above States 
will soon prove to be steps toward compulsory laws, as they 



199] 



CENTRALIZATION IN EDUCATION 



have already in some. It is quite evident, therefore, that 
there is a strong tendency in this field towards State control, 
and the probability that this tendency will grow stronger and 
stronger in the near future is increased by the fact that the 
system seems to be very enthusiastically indorsed in many 
school reports and elsewhere, and on very substantial 
grounds. 1 I think it interesting to quote in conclusion on 
this point the following positive statement and prediction 
contained in the Indiana school report for 1888 (p. 431) : 
•' Free books are a logical consequence of free schools. The 
people need not be scared by the bugbear of paternal gov- 
ernment, which the advocates of laissez-faire in this country 
perpetually invoke. Many things that may be left to indi- 
vidual enterprise in a frontier country, such as our own was 
fifty years ago, can no longer be trusted to such agencies 
when civilization thickens, the struggle becomes severe, and 
the whole machinery a hundred-fold more complex. The 
question of State schools is pretty fairly settled in this coun- 
try in favor of that system. When once it is established that 
free books are essential to the efficiency of these schools in 
the training of the masses, question as to expediency will be 
at an end." 

IV. State Publication. A very extreme and unique case 
of centralization in school administration is the California 
system of State publication of text-books. This system was 
established in 1885 in conformity to a constitutional amend- 
ment of the previous year. Under this system the State 
board of education has had compiled and copyrighted a ser- 
ies of text-books, and the same has been printed under the 
direction of the government printer. The books are furn- 
ished to pupils at cost, and retail dealers are required to 
make an affidavit that they will not sell them at a price ex- 

1 Cf., for example, yth Bien. Tex. Sch. Rep., p. xxxix, and Id. Sch. Rep., 
1893-4, pp. 22-23. 



$8 CENTRALIZATION IN EDUCATION [ 2 oa 

ceeding that fixed by the State board. County school 
boards are required to provide a " revolving fund " in order 
to enable count)' superintendents to purchase the State text- 
books. 1 

It is not within my purpose to fully discuss the merits and 
demerits of State publication. It will suffice to make a few 
quotations from the statements of the California State super- 
intendent concerning the same. In the school report for 
1890 (pp. 37-42) he says: "The advantages of State pub- 
lication are that it has relieved county boards of education 
from the solicitations of book agents ; that it has reduced 
the prices of the books from former rates, and that the 
money spent therefor has been retained in our own 
State. The disadvantages claimed are: first, that it costs 
the State more to manufacture the books than it would 
cost a private publishing house. This is true, because 
the State pays its employes a higher rate of wages 
and requires only eight hours of daily service; second, 
the lack of all competition in the authorship ; third, 
the intrusting of the work of supervision to a board whose 
members are already burdened with duties and which is sub- 
ject to frequent changes." Again he says, in the same re- 
port: "The State publication of text-books in California has 
undoubtedly been one factor in causing the publishers of 
school books generally to reduce their prices, and there is 
not now so great a difference between the prices of our State 
series and those of private publishers." It would seem that 
some of the disadvantages mentioned are not necessarily an 
incident of State publication. Lower wages might be paid, 
if it were desirable, and the expense of printing thus reduced ; 
and the supervision of the w r ork might be given to a special 
board. But whatever the advantages or the disadvantages 
of the system may be, the fact remains that the system has 

1 Act of 1885, sees. 1-10; also Act 1887, sees. 1-7. 



2 o I ] CEN TRALIZA TION IN ED UCA TION 5 g 

been in operation for over ten years, and its creation and 
present existence furnishes a most admirable example of 
centralization in administration ; and it furthermore shows, 
that California is not at all afraid of paternal government and 
extreme centralized administration in the department of edu- 
cation when supposed advantages accrue from the same. 
Local self-government has certainly here been left far behind 
in the search for better administration. 

While referring to this California plan of State publication, 
it may be well to note that the Connecticut State board of 
education is required by law to prepare a text-book in physi- 
ology and hygiene for use in the public schools of the State. 1 
In accordance with this provision the State board, in 1886, 
not only prepared but published a small text-book, which 
was widely circulated throughout the State. It has not been 
the practice of the board, however, to insist on the exclusive 
use of this text-book. 2 It is also interesting in studying the 
recent tendencies, to note that within the past few years bills 
have been introduced into the Legislatures of Indiana, Ohio, 
Illinois, Wisconsin, Missouri, Kansas, Kentucky, New York, 
Iowa and Texas looking towards State publication of text- 
books. One of these bills, that of Illinois, proposed to em- 
ploy convict labor in this work. 

1 Sch. law, 1888, sec. 9. 2 y/h Bi. Tex. Sch. Rep., pp. xxvii-viii. 



CHAPTER VII 

STATE REGULATION OF COURSES OK STUDY 

Closely connected with the subject of text-book regula- 
tion is that of regulation of courses of study. Here again we 
find a strong tendency toward direct State control and extreme 
centralization in administration. The school law of at least 
thirteen States x empowers either the State superintendent or 
the State board of education to prescribe a uniform course of 
study for the common schools of their respective States. 2 
The Territorial board of Arizona is also given the same 
power. The school law of Texas after prescribing a mini- 
mum course of study provides for such other studies as may 
be " directed by the State Superintendent." 

At least eleven States, 3 which have no yet gone so far in 
this direction as the above, have made a certain minimum 
course of study compulsory upon the local authorities, the 
course varying considerably in the different States. Several 
States not only make a certain minimum course of study 
compulsory in all the common schools, but also a further, 
more extensive course for high schools. For example, 
every town in Massachusetts containing 500 families or 
householders is compelled by law to establish a high school 
in which shall be taught, in addition to the subjects ordinarily 
required, general history, book-keeping, surveying, geometry, 
natural philosophy, chemistry, botany, Latin, and the civil 

1 Id., Ky., La., Me., Miss., Mont., Nev., N. D., Pa., S. C, Vt, Wash., W. Va. 
3 Many of these States make very minute regulations concerning the course of 
study. 

3 Cal., Col., Ct., Ind., Ky., Md., Mass., Tex., Tenn., Va., Wis. 

60 [202 



203] CENTRALIZA TION IN ED UCA T10N $ j 

polity of the State and of the United States. 1 Towns con- 
taining 4000 or more inhabitants are still further required to 
maintain instruction in Greek, French, astronomy, geology, 
rhetoric, logic, intellectual and moral science, and political 
economy. 2 Towns containing over 10,000 inhabitants are 
required to furuish to every person over fifteen years of age 
free instruction in industrial and mechanical drawing.3 By 
an act of June 14, 1894, towns containing 20,000 or more in- 
habitants are required to maintain a course in manual train- 
ing, " the course to be pursued in said instruction shall be 
subject to the approval of the State board of education." 
In Vermont all towns containing 2500 or more inhabitants 
are required, in addition to the subjects noted above, to 
maintain instruction in English literature, higher mathe- 
matics, the sciences, political economy, civil government, 
general history and rhetoric. 4 The school law of Maine re- 
quires that " the course of study in the free high schools 
shall embrace the ordinary English academic studies, espec- 
ially the natural sciences in their application to mechanics, 
manufactures and agriculture." 5 

Most of the States thus far mentioned in this chapter, and 
some others which have not gone quite so far in State regu- 
lation as these, have made compulsory in all the schools of 
the several States instruction in physiology and hygiene, 
" with a special reference to the nature of alcohol and nar- 
cotics, and their effects upon the human system." Among 
the States which have practiced State interference in this re- 
spect are the following : Massachusetts, Wisconsin, California, 
Colorado, New York, North Carolina, Iowa, New Hampshire, 
Minnesota, Vermont, Maryland, Michigan, Nebraska, Indiana, 
Pennsylvania, West Virginia, Texas, Connecticut, North 
Dakota, Washington and Montana. 

1 Sch. law, 1892, ch. 44, sec. 2. ^ Ibid. 

3 Ibid., sec. 7. 4 Vermont Stat., 1894, sec. 700. 5 Sch. laxv, 1895, sec. 31. 



52 CENTRALIZATION IX EDUCATION ["204 

A very good example of State control over courses of 
stud)- is displayed in the Minnesota high school board, re- 
ferred to in Chapter III. This board is also a good illustra- 
tion of the fact referred to in Chapter II, that State aid 
inevitably leads to central control. The degree of centraliza- 
tion reached in this Minnesota board may be judged from 
the following brief quotations from the school law. The 
board is required to periodically " visit each school receiving 
aid." It has "full discretionary power to consider and act 
upon applications of schools for State aid, and to prescribe 
the conditions upon which said aid shall be granted." 1 It 
also has the " power to establish any necessary and suitable 
rules and regulations relating to examinations, reports, 
acceptance of schools, courses of study, and other proceed- 
ings under this act." 2 

1 Stat. Minn., 1894, sec. 3873. a Ibid., sec. 3871. 



CHAPTER VIII 

STATE CONTROL OF TEACHERS' EXAMINATIONS 

In no department of school administration is effective cen- 
tral control and supervision more necessary and vital than in 
the examination and determination of the qualifications of 
teachers, and yet, in all the States, until quite recently, this 
element has been conspicuously lacking. The time-honored 
practice has been to leave this matter to the unrestricted 
action and caprice of local authorities. But experience and 
"grinding necessity" have gradually developed a tendency 
toward centralization, and direct State control in this admin- 
istrative field. In many States this tendency is still rather 
weak, but, on the other hand, it is quite strong in others. 

Undoubtedly the State which has gone the farthest in this 
direction is New York, she having developed a very com- 
plete system of uniform State examinations under thorough 
central control. The system has been in nominal existence 
for a number of years, but has recently been greatly 
improved and rendered a reality. As the system now stands 
it is uniform throughout the State, except in certain school 
districts organized under special acts. The questions for ex- 
amination are uniform and are prepared under the direction 
of the superintendent of public instruction. Examinations 
occur on the same date in every commissioner district in 
the State. But the special point of superiority in the New 
York system is the fact that there is a really effective and 
permanent State board of examiners, consisting of exper- 
ienced professional officers long identified with the educa- 
205] 63 



04 < V- .'A' 7 7v\-/ /, /Z,/ 7 /CW IN ED UCA TJON [ 2 o6 

dona] work of the State. This board, consisting of five 
members and two clerks, was organized June I, 1894. All 
answer papers submitted by candidates throughout the 
State are forwarded to the central department, and there ex- 
amined and marked by the State board free from the in- 
fluences of favoritism and personal prejudice. This board is 
established on a non-partisan basis. 1 

The reports of the operation of the above briefly-outlined 
system are certainly favorable and enthusiastic in the ex- 
treme. The State superintendent, in January, 1895, com- 
mented on the system as follows : " This change in the 
method of determining who are entitled to certificates is one 
of the greatest reforms that has been inaugurated in our 
school system for many years, ... It removes the possibil- 
ity of any commissioner exercising unfair discretion for or 
against any teacher. It has lifted the system of examining 
and licensing teachers above all considerations except their 
fitness to enter the service. . . . The uniform system is of 
great advantage and convenience to teachers. Under this 
system a certificate of any grade issued in one county stands 
for the same value as a certificate of corresponding grade in 
any other county in the State, and a teacher who becomes en- 
titled to a certificate of any grade may receive the benefits 
to which he or she is entitled under such certificate in any 
commissioner district in the State without further examina- 
tion. ... It is gratifying to report that the system is meet- 
ing with success from every standpoint, is giving entire satis- 
faction, and has the hearty support of all the educational 
forces of the State. ... Its results thus far have more than 
met our most sanguine expectations." 2 

Mississippi also has a State board of examiners, appointed 
by the governor, whose duty it is to grade the papers of all 

1 For fuller outline of the system, cf., 41 A 7 ". Y. Sch. Rep., pp. 30-31. 

2 Ibid., pp. 31-32. 



207] CENTRALIZA TION IN EDUCA TION 65 

applicants for certificates, and which is empowered to hear 
and decide all appeals regarding examinations. 1 The weak 
point in the Mississippi law seems to be the fact that the 
compensation of the board consists entirely of examination 
fees. 

In at least sixteen States and Territories, 2 the school law 
provides that uniform examination questions shall be pre- 
pared either by the State superintendent, State board of ed- 
ucation, or State board of examiners. In most of these 
States the same authorities are empowered to fix uniform 
dates for examinations and to prescribe rules and regulations 
for conducting the same. Without specifically conferring 
this power of preparing uniform questions, the law of New 
Hampshire provides that examinations shall be conducted 
" by such persons and in such manner as the State superin- 
tendent may designate." 3 The Wyoming State superintend- 
ent is empowered to " regulate the grade of county certifi- 
cates." 4 In Missouri the county superintendents are to be 
guided by the instructions of the State superintendent in the 
examination, grading and licensing of teachers." 5 The New 
Jersey State board, acting under its general power to make 
regulations, has provided quite in detail for a system of uni- 
form examinations." 6 In Indiana a system of uniform exam- 
inations under the direction of the State board of education 
has been evolved from the following broad grant of power 
made in 1865 : " The State board of education is empowered 
to take cognizance of such questions as may arise in the 
practical administration of the school system not otherwise 

1 Sch. laws of i8q6, no. 1, sec. 4. 

2 Ark., Fla., Id., Kan., Mich., Miss., Mont., Nev., N. D., O., Ok., S. C, Tenn., 
Tex., Vt., Wash. 

3 Act March 19, 1895, S^- ^ aw > 1 ^95>p. 41. 

* Com. Ed. Rep., 1893-4, p. 1254. 5 Ibid., p. 1220. 

6 Sch. law, 1895, PP- I 37~4 2 « 



66 CENTRALIZATION IN EDUCATION [ 2 o8 

provided for." 1 The system thus evolved received direct 
legislative sanction in 1883 by the enactment of the following 
section: "Whosoever shall sell, barter, or give away, to ap- 
plicants for license, or to any other person, the questions 
prepared by the State board of education, to be used by 
the county superintendents in the examination of teachers, or 
in any way dispose of said questions contrary to the rules 
prescribed by said State board of education, shall be deemed 
guilty of a misdemeanor; and on conviction shall be fined 
in any sum not less than ten nor more than two hundred 
dollars." 2 

It would seem, therefore, that the laws of the above States 
afford ample basis for quite thorough central control over 
the examination of teachers. It is well to note, also, that in 
a very large number of States which have not gone so far in 
this direction as have the above, there is a system of special 
State certificates granted by the State board, which certifi- 
cates are valid in any portion of the State. 3 Generally the 
State board is given very large powers of regulation and con- 
trol over these certificates. 4 In most of the States also the 
subjects in which candidates are examined are prescribed by 
the central authorities. It is also very common for the State 
to fix the general average which all local examining boards 
must require, and to prescribe certain qualifications and dis- 
qualifications for teachers. Furthermore, in many States 
which have not yet established a complete system of uniform 
examinations under central control, this question is being 

1 Annot. Sch. lazu, 1895, P- 53- 2 ^id. 

3 The law of many States provides that diplomas from State normal schools 
shall be accepted by local authorities in lieu of the regular examinations. A few 
of the States provide for the same exemption for holders of teachers' diplomas 
from the State university and certain colleges. 

* Generally certificates are revocable for good cause by the authorities granting 
the same. The New York State superintendent can annul for cause any certificate 
granted by any authority in the State. 



2 39] CENTRA LIZA TION IN ED UCA TION £j 

favorably agitated and urgently recommended by school 
officers and others. It seems very safe to conclude, there- 
fore, from all the foregoing facts, that there is a very strong 
and growing tendency among the States to place the exam- 
ination of teachers under direct State control, and to central- 
ize the administration of the same. Here again, in this field, 
the new tendency at first met with violent opposition in 
some States. 1 As the State superintendent of Arkansas re- 
cently said, "The opponents of the system frequently called 
up the spook * centralization,' and used it in their arguments 
to frighten the bystanders. The dead heroes turn over in 
their graves when this term is applied to the machinery of a 
State." But, in spite of the "spooks" and the "dead 
heroes," the system has, as we have seen, gained a firm foot- 
hold, and has rapidly banished its enemies. In this field, 
also, it has been clearly demonstrated that the extreme 
application of the principle of "local self-government" must 
give way if the best possible school system is to be de- 
veloped. 

1 Cf., for example, Miss. Sch. Rep., 1893-95, p. 41, and Fla. Sch. Rep., 1892-94, 
pp. 81-82. 



CHAPTER IX 

STATE CONTROL OF TEACHERS' INSTITUTES 

DURING the past fifty years there has been a very general 
development of teachers' institutes until to-day, they are 
established in nearly, if not quite, all of the States and Terri- 
tories of the Union. There is still, however, a very great 
diversity among the various States in respect to the mode of 
organizing, regulating and supporting these institutes. In 
some States they are wholly voluntary associations, and in 
others they are made compulsory by law ; in some they are 
held directly under State authority, and in others under local 
authority ; in some they are organized into a State or district 
system, and in others into a county system. In some States 
the expenses are paid out of State funds ; in others out of 
county funds ; in others by the fees for teachers' licenses ; 
and in still others by contributions from teachers. In some 
cases the institutes are held at regular times when the schools 
are closed, and in others they are held at any time the various 
local authorities may decide and when the schools are in 
session ; in some the schools are closed during the sessions of 
the institute and in others they are not; in some the teachers 
are paid their regular wages while in attendance and in 
others they are not; in some attendance on the part of 
teachers is made compulsory and in others it is not. 

The degree of State control and centralization existing in 

the organization and management of teachers' institutes will 

appear by examining the laws of the various States with 

reference to some of the above characteristics. First, let us 

68 [210 



2 1 i ] CENTRALIZA TION IN ED UCA TTON fig 

notice that in twenty States the holding of State, district, 
county, or township institutes (in some cases both State and 
local institutes) has been made unconditionally compulsory* 
The holding of institutes is made conditionally compulsory 
as follows: in Washington, in every county containing 25 
or more school districts; 2 in California, in every county con- 
taining 20 or more districts; 3 in Mississippi, in every county 
containing 15 or more districts; 4 in Montana, in every 
county containing 5 or more districts; 5 in Alabama, in every 
county containing 10 or more teachers of either color; 6 in 
Missouri, in every county voting to employ all the time of 
the county commissioner. 7 In Michigan one annual State 
institute is made compulsory and one county institute in 
every county containing 1000 or more children of school 
age. 8 In Wisconsin the State superintendent and the board 
of regents of the Normal Schools decide what counties shall 
have institutes. 9 In Minnesota the State superintendent 
alone decides. 10 

State authority has been still farther exercised in twenty- 
three cases " by making attendance at institutes compulsory on 
the part of teachers. In eight of these States 12 this require- 

1 Ark., Col. {Sch. taw, 1891, sec. 81), Del., Ind., 111., Kan., Ky., Neb., Fla., 
Md., N. D., N. H., N. Y., Pa., Tex., Vt, W. Va., Or., Wy., N, J. (a regulation of 
the State board makes county institutes practically compulsory. Cf., Sch. law, 
1895, P- 143-) 

2 Sch. law, 1893, sec - 7 2 - 3 Sch' ^ aw > ^95, p. 12. 

* Sch. law, 1894, sec. 4061. 5 Sch. law, 1895, sec « l 9°°- 

6 Code A lab., sec. 995. 7 Com. Ed. Rep., 1884-85, p. 161. 

8 Sch. law, 1895, ch. 15, sec. 3. 

9 Sanborn & Berryman, Annot. Stat. Wis., sec. 407. 

10 Stat. Minn, of 18Q4, sec. 3727. 

11 Al., Ariz., Ark., Cal., Del., Id., Ind. (by a decision of the State superintendent, 
cf., Sch. lazu, 1895, sec * 45 2 °> n - 3)» Ky., Minn., Mo., Mont., Neb., Nev., N. Y., 
N. C, N. D., S. D., N. J., Or., Tex., Wash., Wy., W. Va. (until prescribed graded 
course of institute work and professional study is completed.) 

12 Ky., Mont., Neb., N. Y., N. D., Or., Wash., W. Va. 



j CENTRALIZATION IX EDUCATION T 2 i2 

ment is rendered effective by making the certificates of non- 
attending teachers revocable. Two of these States l impose 
the additional penalty of forfeiture of wages during institute 
session. Louisiana imposes the sole penalty of forfeiture of 
one day's wages. Quite a number of the above mentioned 
States have offered an incentive for attendance at institutes 
by providing that teachers shall suffer no loss of wages for 
attendance upon institutes held when the schools are in ses- 
sion. The school laws of at least seventeen States contain 
provisions of this character. 2 In Colorado 5 per cent, is 
added for attendance to the examination grade of all candi- 
dates for teachers' certificates. 3 Some of the States not only 
make attendance at institutes compulsory and require local 
authorities to secure teachers against loss of wages during 
said attendance, but also specifically require the schools to 
be closed during institute sessions. 4 

Teachers' institutes have been made the subject of annual 
State appropriations, as follows: In New York, $30,000 ; s 
Arkansas, $10,000 (for county normal institutes) ; 6 Minne- 
sota 7 and Wisconsin, 8 $7,000 each; Massachusetts 9 and 
Connecticut, 10 $3,000 each; Tennessee," $1,500; West Vir- 
ginia 12 and Rhode Island, 13 $500 each; Michigan, $400 for 
State institute and $60 for each county institute, if county 
fund is not sufficient; I4 Nevada, $100; I5 New Jersey, $100 
for each county; 16 Iowa, $50 for each county institute 

1 Mont., N. D. 

2 Ariz., Ark., Cal., Del., Id., Ind., Ky., Mich., Minn., Mont., Neb., N. J., N. Y., 
N. D., Or., Pa., Wash. 3 Sch. law, 1891, sec. 81. 

4 Among these are Ky., Id., Ind., Neb., N. Y., N. D., Pa. 

5 Consol. Sch. law, 1895, t^le x » sec * 8. 6 Sch. law, 1895, P* 2 4> A- * I ^95- 

7 Stat. Minn., 1 894, sees. 3728-32. 8 Sanborn & Berryman, Stat. Wis., sec. 407. 

8 Sch. law, 1892, ch. 42, sec. 2. 10 Sch. law, 1896, sec. 13. 

11 Sch. Rep., 1895, P- I2 - " Code W. Va., 1891, p. 378. 

13 Pub. Stat. R. I., 1882, p. 153. '* Sch. law, 1895, ch. 15, sees. 4 and 7. 

15 Gen. Stat. Nev., 1885, sec. 1291. ,6 Sch. law, 1895, PP- 49 _ 5°- 



213] CENTRALIZA TION IN ED UCA TION j j 

actually held ; * Kansas, $50 for each county institute with 
fifty registered attendants; 2 Colorado, $50 for each district 
institute with twenty registered attendants ; 3 North Dakota, 
$50 for each county containing ten or more teachers. 4 In 
New Hampshire the proceeds of the sales of certain lands 
are set apart as a permanent institute fund. 5 The Vermont 
school law provides for a State appropriation of a sum not 
exceeding $30 per day for 4 days for each institute, and a 
sum not exceeding $25 per day for 10 days for summer 
schools held during years when no institute is held in the 
county. 6 

Quite a number of States have not only exercised an ex- 
tensive control over teachers' institutes through the law- 
making body as shown above, but have specifically conferred 
upon the State board or the State superintendent an exten- 
sive administrative control. 

For example, these central authorities are very frequently 
specifically empowered to " select the times and places" for 
holding institutes ; to fix the duration of the same ; to em- 
ploy the instructors and conductors, and fix their compen- 
sation ; in a few cases to prescribe the programmes and 
courses of study; in a few cases to determine the number of 
institutes to be held each year. But in addition, quite a 
number of the States have conferred on these central educa- 
tional authorities the power to " prescribe all rules and reg- 
ulations," to " make suitable arrangements" for institutes, or 
to have " full charge" of the same. Such clauses in vari- 
ous school laws furnish, I think, a sufficient legal basis for 
full administrative control, and have in most cases been so 
acted upon. Clauses of this nature, or others from which the 
same power can, I think, be fairly inferred, are contained 

1 Sch. law, 1892, sec. 1584. 2 Gen. Stat. Kan., 1889, sec. 5660. 

s Sch.law, 1 89 1, sec. 81. * Sch. law, 1896, p. 61. 

5 Sch. law, 1895, cn - 94» sec - 4* 6 Vermont Stat., 1894, sees. 598 and 601. 



j 2 CENTRALIZATION IN EDUCATION [214 

in the school laws of at least all of the following States: 
Arkansas, 1 Connecticut, 2 Florida, 3 Louisiana, 4 Massachusetts, 5 
Michigan, 6 Minnesota, 7 Mississippi, 8 Nebraska, 9 Nevada, 10 
New Hampshire, 11 New Jersey, 12 New York/ 3 North Dakota, 14 
Rhode Island, 15 Vermont, 13 West Virginia 17 and Wisconsin. 18 

1 Act, April 20, 1895, sec - 2 » c f'i Sch. l aw > ^95- 

2 Sch. law, 1896, sec. 13. 3 Sch. lazu, 1 895, sec. 23* 3rd. 

* Com. Ed. Rep., 1884-5, PP- I0 3 - 4- 5 Sch. law, 1892, ch. 42, sees. 1-3. 

6 Sch. law, 1S95, cn - J 5> secs - 3> 4 an ^ 7- 7 Stat. Minn., 1894, sec. 3727. 

8 Sch. law, 1894, secs. 4062-63. 9 Sch. law, 1895, p. 5 2 - 

10 Gen. Stat. Nev., 1885, sec. 1291. " Sch. Law, 1895, cn - 94» sec - 4* 

12 Rule 36, Sch. law, 1895, V- *43- ri Consol. Sch. law, 1895, title x » sec - I - 

14 .SV/fc. /aw, 1896, pp. 24 and 62. Va Pub. Stat. P. I., 1882, p. 153. 

16 Vermont Slat., 1894, sec, 598. 1T Code W. Va. t 1891, p. 378. 

18 Sanborn & Berryman, Annot. Stat. Wis., sec. 407. 



CHAPTER X 

APPELLATE JURISDICTION OF STATE SUPERINTENDENTS AND 
STATE BOARDS OF EDUCATION 

QUITE a sharp entering wedge towards centralization has 
been driven in many States by vesting either in the State 
superintendent or the State board of education the power of 
hearing appeals and deciding controversies among local au- 
thorities arising under the school laws. This appellate juris- 
diction has been expressly conferred by law upon the central 
educational authorities in at least twenty-eight States. 1 Al- 
though the extent of this jurisdiction varies somewhat in the 
different States, it will be fair, I think, to quote the New 
York law as somewhat typical of at least quite a number of 
the above States. The provisions of the present New York 
law on this subject are as follows : 

Title XIV. Section I. " Any person conceiving himself 
aggrieved in consequence of any decision made : 

(i) By any school district meeting; 

(2) By any school commissioner or school commissioners 
and other officers, in forming or altering, or refusing to form 
or alter, any school district, or in refusing to apportion any 
school moneys in any such district or part of a district; 

(3) By a supervisor in refusing to pay any such moneys 
to any such district ; 

(4) By the trustees of any district in paying or refusing to 
pay any teacher, or in refusing to admit any scholar gratui- 
tously into any school ; 

1 Cal., Col., Del., Fla., Ga., 111., Ind., la., Kan., Ky., La., Md., Miss., Mont., 
Neb., Nev., N. J., N. Y., N. D., Or., Pa., R. I., S. D., Tex., Ut., Va., Wash., Wis. 
215] 73 



74 CENTRALIZATION IN EDUCATION \ 2 \ 6 

(5) By any trustees of any school library concerning such 
library, or the books therein, or the use of such books ; 

(6) By any district meeting in relation to the library; 

(7) By any other official act or decision concerning any 
other matter under this act, or any other act pertaining to 
common schools, may appeal to the superintendent of public 
instruction, who is hereby authorized and required to 
examine and decide the same ; and his decision shall be 

final and conclusive, and not subject to question or review in 
any place or court whatever!' 

The superintendent of public instrection is also empowered 
to regulate the practice in these appeals, and to make all 
orders " necessary or proper to give effect to his decision." 

The express statement of the law in quite a few of the 
States besides New York, and the evident intent of the law 
in most of the above States, is that the decisions of either the 
State board or the State superintendent shall be final, 
although the law of some of these States subjects this appel- 
late jurisdiction of the educational department to the control 
of the courts. 1 The absence of contested cases in the courts 
in most of these States would also seem to indicate that in 
practice the appellate jurisdiction of the State educational 
authorities is final. 

Although the question of the appellate jurisdiction of the 
State superintendent and the State board has not often been 
taken into the courts, there have been a few cases, and these 
have served to define more clearly the nature and the ex- 
tent of this jurisdiction. Indeed, we cannot get a correct 
idea of this appellate jurisdiction without noting some of 
these cases. 

One of the earliest cases bearing on the general question was 
that of Joint School District No. 7 vs. Wolfe? rendered by the 

1 Cf., for example, Neb. Sch. law, 1895, p. 48; N. D. Sch. law, 1896, p. 27; 
Wash. Sch. law, 1893, p. 8. a 12 Wis., 765. 



21^] CEN'l RALIZA TWN IN ED UCA TION 7 5 

Wisconsin Supreme Court in 1 860. In this case, in connection 
with a decision that the assistant State superintendent could 
not hear appeals, the court admitted that the decision of the 
State superintendent was final concerning the formation and 
alteration of school districts, " or concerning any other matter 
under the school law of the State!' Eighteen years later 
(1878), in the case of State ex rel. Burpee vs. Burton? the 
same court held that the decisions of the department of pub- 
lic instruction upon questions within its jurisdiction are en- 
titled to great weight, and should not be overruled by the 
courts unless clearly contrary to law. Closely related with 
this latter decision was that rendered in the Appeal of 
Cottrell, 2 (1873), which held that such decisions of the de- 
partment are of value in construing the school law when it 
admits of different constructions. 

In 1867, the New York Supreme Court, in the case of 
People vs. Collins, 3, held that the decision of the State super- 
intendent was "final and conclusive, and not subject to ques- 
tion or review in any place or court whatever," regarding " all 
questions relating to the holding of school district meetings, 
and any and all official acts of school officers, trustees, com- 
missioners, supervisors, or others, relating to the conduct of 
common schools, or concerning any matter, act or duty re- 
quired or performed under the law providing for the organi- 
zation and maintenance of common schools, or any law 
relating or pertaining thereto." In 1880, in the case of 
People ex rel. Yale vs. Eckler 4 the same court held sub- 
stantially the same opinion. This was a case of a school 
trustee engaging a teacher and then discharging him before 
the expiration of the time of the contract and refusing to 
pay. On appeal the State superintendent decided in favor 
of the teacher and directed the trustee to pay the amount 
claimed. The court upheld this decision of the State super- 

1 45 Wis., 150. 2 10 R. I., 615. 3 34 How,. Pr., 336. 4 19 Hun., 609, 



-o CENTRALIZATION IN EDUCATION \ 2 lS 

intendent, again declaring that his decision was " final and 
conclusive, and not subject to question or review in any 
place or court whatsoever." At the same time the court de- 
clared that the trustee waived any right he may have had to 
a trial of the question by a jury, by answering the appeal 
and submitting the case without objection to the superin- 
tendent. Again in 1892, in the case of People ex rel. Clingan 
vs. Draper, 1 the Supreme Court upheld the decision of the 
State superintendent and declared that the court would not 
reverse the decision of that official as to a matter where the 
statute made his decision conclusive. This was a case of 
the State superintendent declaring a certain action of a cer- 
tain district void, and removing a trustee for not closing up 
the affairs of said district pursuant to a law passed in 1 891. 
On the other hand, this court has decided, in the case of 
People ex rel. Trustees vs. Town Auditors? (1891), that " the 
power to hear and determine an appeal from the action of 
the town auditors is not included in the jurisdiction con- 
ferred by the legislature upon the superintendent in the 
statute relating to schools." 

In 1887 the Iowa Supreme Court, in the case of Newby 
vs. Free? held that, as to such questions as are by law within 
the jurisdiction of the various school officers of the State, 
" the decision of the superintendent of public instruction 
must be regarded as final and conclusive, and binding on the 
parties, and it follows that such decisions must be enforced 
by the courts." 

The Maryland Court of Appeals, in the case of Wiley, et 
aL, Trustees vs. School Commissioners of Alleghany Co.? 
(1879), held that the power of the State board of education 
to decide controversies was a " visitorial power of the most 
comprehensive character, . . . and wherever that power 
exists, and is comprehensive enough to deal with the ques- 

1 63 Hun., 389. 2 126 N. Y., 528. 3 72 la., 379. * 51 Md., 401. 



2 1 9 ] CENTRALIZA TION IN ED UCA TION y y 

tions involved in an existing controversy, courts of equity 
decline all interference, and leave parties to abide the sum- 
mary decision of those clothed with the visitorial authority." 

It has also been decided that the State superintendent 
may make all needful rules and regulations for the hearing 
of appeals, " including a rule requiring the evidence to be 
submitted in the form of affidavits, and the arguments of 
parties or their counsel in writing, without a personal hear- 
ing or oral examination of witnesses before him;" 1 and 
further that he has the power to correct mistakes made in 
rendering judgment in a case before him possessed by all 
courts and judicial officers. 2 

It appears, therefore, that the appellate jurisdiction of the 
central educational authorities has become quite firmly es- 
tablished in law and practice in a large number of our States. 
And only a moment's reflection will reveal the vast import- 
ance of this power. Such a power and jurisdiction offers 
almost endless opportunity for central control of local au- 
thorities and for securing a more uniform administration of 
the school law. Indeed in some States these decisions of 
the State superintendent constitute quite an extensive body 
of supplementary school law, as an examination of even the 
decisions printed in the school reports will show. And it is 
not too much to predict that wherever firmly established this 
power will surely bring about a more and more thorough cen- 
tral control and regulation. This appellate jurisdiction, of the 
State superintendent is one of the really strong tendencies 
toward centralization which the latter half of the century has 
developed. 

We have now passed in review some of the leading feat- 
ures of the school systems of the various States, and have 

1 State ex rel. Moreland v. Whitford, 54 Wis., 150. 

2 Desmond v. the Independent District of Glenwood, 71 la., 23. 



78 CENTRALIZATION IN EDUCATION [220 

discovered quite a strong under-current toward centralization 
in educational administration. In spite of our extreme de- 
votion as a people to the principle of local self-government, 
we have not hesitated to reject the principle to a great ex- 
tent in order to secure greater efficiency in the administra- 
tion of our public school systems. And it is well to note 
before leaving our subject that this tendency discovered in 
educational administration is in accord with a similar ten- 
dency in other departments. Already our whole national 
system of administration has become quite thoroughly 
centralized, and, although we have by no means gone so far 
in our commonwealth administration, yet even here educa- 
tion is not the only department in which this centralizing 
tendency can be discovered. The same tendency is every 
year becoming more and more evident in public health and 
poor-law administration, in the assessment of taxes and the 
auditing of local accounts. In conclusion the writer wishes 
to express his opinion that this tendency is a wholesome and 
safe one, and our people need not be frightened by the bug- 
bear of paternal government which the opponents of this 
tendency continually invoke. It is an incontestable fact 
that in the field of educational administration, as well as in 
the other fields just mentioned, this centralization has led to 
increased administrative efficiency; and it is not too much 
to predict that as our civilization becomes more complex 
this tendency, which is already quite marked, will become 
more and more pronounced and felt in other States and 
other fields of administration. 



Systematic Political Science 



BY THE 



FACULTY OF POLITICAL SCIENCE OF 
COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY. 



The Faculty of Political Science of Columbia University have 
in course of publication a series of systematic works covering the 
entire field of political science proper and of the allied sciences of 
public law and economics. The method of treatment is historical, 
comparative and statistical; and it is the aim of the writers to pre- 
sent the latest results of institutional development and of scientific 
thought in Europe and America. 

The series includes the following ten works : 

Political Science and Comparative Constitutional Law. 

2 vols. Published by Ginn 6° Co., 1891. By John W. Burgess. 

Comparative Administrative Law. 

2 vols. Published by G. P. Putnam's Sons, 1893. By Frank J. Goodnow. 

International Law. In preparation. . . By John Bassett Moore 

Historical and Comparative Jurisprudence. 

In preparation By Munroe Smith. 

The Distribution of Wealth. 2 vols. In preparation. By John B. Clark. 

The Science of Statistics. 2 vols. Vol. I, published by the Columbia Uni- 
versity Press {Macmillan), 1895. . By Richmond Mayo-Smith. 

Historical and Comparative Science of Finance. 

2 vols. In preparation. By Edwin R. A. Seligman. 

The Principles of Sociology. Published by the Columbia University Press 
{Macmillan), 1896 By Franklin H. Giddings. 

History of Political Theories. In preparation. By William A. Dunning. 

Literature of Political Science. In preparation. . By George II. Baker. 



Th? MacrRillan Company's Te^f=Books. 

FOR STUDENTS OF THE HISTORY 
AND INSTITUTIONS OF THE UNITED STATES. 

Now Ready. Price, $1 .75 Net. 
Bryce's American Commonwealth for Student's Use. 

Revised by Mr. Bryce, with the assistance of Prof. Jesse Macy, of Iowa 
College. This is not a mere condensation of the larger work, but a restatement, 
briefer and in a form more carefully adapted to use as a text book, of the valuable 
material in Mr. Bryce's "American Commonwealth," a knowledge of which is 
conceded to be indispensable to any one who would acquire a just estimate of 
American Institutions. 



By Prof. Clianning of Harvard University. 

The United States of America, 1765=1865. 

By Edward Channing, Professor of History in Harvard University. 

Cambridge Historical Series, $1.50 Net. 

" The knowledge of history displayed by the author is vast, his grasp of the subject is firm, 
and his style is admirably clear, direct, and simple.'* — The Critic. 



By Goldwin Smith, D. C. L. 

The United States. 

An Outline of Political History, 1492-1871. 

3d Edition. With Map. Crown Svo. $2.00. 

"Is a literary masterpiece, as readable as a novel, remarkable for its compression without 
dryness, and its brilliancy without any rhetorical effort or display. What American could, with 
so broad a grasp and so perfect a style, have rehearsed our poluical history from Columbus to 
Grant in 300 duodecimo pages of open type, or would have manifested greater candor in his 
judgment of men and events in a period of four centuries? It is enough to say that no one before 
Mr. Smith has attempted the feat, and that he has the field to himself." — The Nation. 



Sources of The Constitution of the 
United States. 

Considered in Relation to Colonial and English History. 

By C. Ellis Stevens, LL. D., D. C. L., F. S. A. (Edin.) 

I2mo. Cloth. $2.00 JVee. 

Second Edition. 

"The volume is one which merits the most careful attention of the students of our institutions, 
since it presents more fully and proves more conclusively than does any ether work the theory 
that our constitution was not, as Mr. Gladstone said, ' a most wonderful work struck off at a 
given time by the brain and purpose of man,' but is rather an embodiment in a logical form of 
institutions which had been the growth of centuries. . . . One of the most interesting chapters of 
Mr. Stevens' volume is that in which he treats of the judiciary. It has been generally admitted 
that the model of our state courts i-> English, but so distinguished an authority as Sir Henry 
Maine says that there is no exact precedent for our supreme court either in the ancient or mod- 
ern world. Mr Stevens, however, shows as we take it most conclusively that in no particular 
does our constitution more conform to English models than in this very matter of the supreme 
court, and that in every respect it rests upon colunial and English precedents." — Boston Daily 
Advertiser. 

THE MAOMILLAN COMPANY, Publishers, 

NEW YORK. CHICAGO. SAN FRANCISCO. 



NEW BOOKS ON HISTORY, ETC. 

VOLUME I. READY IN JUNE. 
AflERICAN HISTORY AS TOLD BY CONTEMPORARIES. 

By ALBERT BUSHNELL HART, Professor of History, Harvard University. 

Vol. I. ERA OF COLONIZATION. (1492-1689.) Ready in June. 

Vol. II. BUILDING OF THE REPUBLIC. (1689-1783.) In preparation. 

Vol. III. NATIONAL EXPANSION. (1783-1845.) To follow. 

Vol. IV. WELDING OF THE NATION. (1846-1896.) To follow. 

This series is made up entirely from the original sources of American history, the records and 
narratives of men who witnessed and shared in the events which they describe. Extracts, long 
enough in each case to give some idea of the writer's style, are arranged in a logical sequence, so 
as to make up a general account of the times from the first voyages to the present day. To each 
volume is prefixed a Practical Introduction on the use of sources by teachers, students, pupils, 
libraries, and readers, with a bibliography of the most valuable sources and collections. 

It is hoped that these volumes may aid in the proper teaching and study of American history, 
by putting within the reach of classes some of the illustrative material which supplements and 
makes more vivid the regular narrative histories. Every pains will be taken to make exact tran- 
scripts, and to suggest proper secondary accounts parallel with the narratives selected. 

NOW READY. 

THE NATIONAL MOVEMENT IN THE REIGN OF HENRY III. AND ITS CULniNA- 

TION IN THE BARONS' WAR. 

By OLIVER H. RICHARDSON, A. B., Professor of History in Drury College. 

i2mo, cloth. Price, $1.50 net. 
" The author is specially well versed in the poetical literature of that day. His book is not 
meant to be popular or picturesque, but it is one of those monographs on a historical epoch which 
are invaluable to students of history." — Boston Herald. 

A HAND-BOOK OF GREEK CONSTITUTIONAL HISTORY. 

By A. H. J. GREENIDGE, M. A., Lecturer in Ancient History, Brasenose College, 

Oxford. 

Crown 8vo, cloth, $1.25 net. 
A new volume in the Series of Hand-books of Archaeology and Art, to which belongs Gardner's 
Greek Sculpture, etc. 

THE ENGLISH CONSTITUTION : A COMMENTARY ON ITS NATURE AND 

GROWTH. 

By JESSE MACY, Professor of Political Science, Iowa College. 
Part One especially is a valuable introduction to Bryce's American Commonwealth, sup- 
plying such a knowledge of English Institutions as is there presupposed. 
Cloth. Price, $2.00 net. 
" The writer has evidently given much study to the subject and has succeeded in bringing the 
result of his research within moderate limits and adding to current literature a volume of more 
than passing value." — Milwaukee Sentinel. 

FOREIGN STATESMEN SERIES. 

NEW VOLUMES. 

Edited by Professor J. B. Bury, author of "A History of the Later Roman Empire." 
Uniform with " Twelve English Statesmen." 

Crown 8vo. Cloth. Price, 75 cents each. 

The new series does not aim at including every statesman who has made his mark in the history 
of his country; it is necessarily limited to a selection from those who have exercised a command- 
ing influence on the general course of European affairs, and impressed their memory deeply on 
the minds of men. 
MARIA THERESA. By Rev. J. Franck Bright, D. D., Master of University College, Oxford. 

This covers the period from 1740 to 1770, which thirty years included the War of the Austrian 
Succession and the Seven Years' War. 
JOSEPH II. By Rev. J. Franck Bright. A direct continuation of the preceding. 

"Atonce learned, lucid, instructive, and full of genuine historic insight." — The Times (London). 

Send for a list of Books on History, Economics, and Philosophy. Part V. of the 
Educational Catalogue published by 

THE MACMILLAN COMPANY, 66 Fifth Ave., New York. 



New Books on the Social and Political 
Aspects of United States History. 

THE THEORY OF SOCIALIZATION. 

A Syllabus of the Principles of Sociology. 
By FRANKLIN H. GIDDINGS, 

Professor of Sociology, Columbia University . 
Pamphlet, Svo. 00 cents, net. 

Intended to offer a convenient text-book in Sociology to college and university classes. With 
references to " The Principles of Sociology," by the same author, for those who wish something 
more, it gives the chief theoretical principles in compact form and consecutive order. 

From the Press Comments of "Principles of Sociology "on 
which the new Syllabus is based: 

" If one is in search of a perfectly clear, impartial and interesting discussion of the subjects in- 
dicated, he will be more than satisfied with this royal volume." — The New York Hei'ald. 

" If not the last word on the subject, it is one of special and deep significance." — Public 
Ledger, Philadelphia. 

BRYCE'S AMERICAN COMMONWEALTH. 

FOR STUDENT'S USE. 

Revised by Mr. Bryce, with the assistance of Prof. Jesse Macy, of Iowa College. This is 
not a mere condensation of the larger work, but a restatement, briefer and in a form more care- 
fully adapted to use as a text-book, of the valuable material in Mr. Bryce's " American Common- 
wealth," a knowledge of which is conceded to be indispensable to any one who would acquire a 
just estimate of American Institutions. 

Large i2mo. Cloth. Price, $1.75 net. 

" The work cannot be too highly commended." — The Tribune, New York. 
" By far the most able work ever written of the United States is this " American Common- 
wealth." — The Inter-Ocean, Chicago. 

Published for the Columbia University Press by The Macmillan Co. 

MUNICIPAL PROBLEMS. 

By FRANK J. GOODNOW, LL. D., 

Professor of Administrative Law, Columbia University in the City of New York. 
Author of "Municipal Home Rule," 11 etc. 

i6mo. Cloth. $1.50 net. 

" This is a scholarly, thoughtful and independent criticism of municipal experiences and the 
plans now urged to better municipal conditions. The volume is an exceedingly valuable one to 
close students of municipal affairs." — The Outlook, New York. 

" We doubt if any author has achieved such eminent success in the solution of the difficult 
problems of city government as the author of the present work." — Times Union, Albany. 



MUNICIPAL HOME RULE. 

A Study in Administration. 
By FRANK J. GOODNOW, LL. D., 

Professor of Administrative Law, Columbia Uuiversity in the City of New York. 
Cloth. i6mo. $1.50 net. 

COMMENTS. 

" We question if any other book before has achieved quite the important service to what may 
be termed theoretic municipalism. . . . One that all those interested in municipal matters should 
read. . . . Moderate in tone, sound in argument, and impartial in its conclusions, it is a work 
that deserves to carry weight." — London Liberal. 

"Here is without doubt one of the most trenchant and scholarly contributions to political 
science of recent writing, remarkable for analytical power and lucidity of statement." — Chicago 
Evening Post. 

The Macmillan Company, 66 Fifth flyeniie, Neu) York. 



IMPORTANT WORKS ON THE QUESTIONS OF THE DAY, VIZ., 



Gold, Silver, Trusts, Taxation, Strikes, and Political Economy. 



BASTABLE.-Public Finance. By C. F. 
Bastable, M. A., LL. D , Professor of Po- 
litical Economy in the University of Dublin. 
Second Edition. Revised and Enlarged. 
8vo. $4.00, net. 

BOHM-BAWERK— Capital and Inter- 
est. By Eugene V. Bohm-Bawerk. 
Translated, with a Preface and Analysis, by 
William Smart. 8vo. #4.00. 

BOHM-BAWERK.-The Positive The- 
ory Of Capital. Translated wilh a Preface 
and Analysis, by William Smart, M.A. 
8vo. $4.00. 

COMMONS— The Distribution of 
Wealth. By John R. Commons, Professor 
of Economics and Social Science, Indiana 
University. i2mo. $1.75, net. 

CUNNINGHAM— The Growth of En- 
glish Industry and Commerce in 
Modern Times. By W. Cunningham. 
8vo. $4.50. 

DAVENPORT.— Outlines of Economic 
Theory. By Herbert Joseph Daven- 
port. i2ino. Cloth, $2.00, net. 

DEL MAR.— The Science of Money.. .By 
Alexander Del Mar. Second Edition. 
Revised by the Author. 8vo. $2.25. 

DYER. -The Evolution of Industry. By 
Henrv Dyer, C. E., M. A., D. Sc, etc. 
i2ino. $1.50. 

FONDA.— Honest Money. By Arthur I. 

Fonda. 12inO. $I.OC. 

HORTON.— The Silver Pound and Eng- 
land's Monetary Policy Since the 
Restoration, Together with the His- 
tory Of the Guinea. Illustrated by Con- 
temporary Documents. By S. Dana Hor- 
ton, a Delegate of the United States of 
America to the International Monetary Con- 
ference of 1878-1801. 8vo. $4.00. 

HORTON.-Silver in Europe. By S. 

Dana Horton. Second Edition, Enlarged. 
i2mo. $7.50, net. 

HOWELL— A Handy-Bools of the La- 
bor Laws. Being a Popular Guide to the 
Employers and Workmen Act, 187s ; Trade- 
Union Acts, 1871, 1876, and T893, etc. With 
Introductions, Notes, and the Authorized 
Rules and Forms for the Use of Workmen. 
By George Howell, F. S. S., M. P. Third 
Edition, Revised. i2ino. $1.50. 



JEVONS.— Investigations in Currency 

and Finance. By W. Stanley Jhvons, 
LL. D., M.D., F. R.S. Illustrated by 
Tweaty Diagrams. Edited, with an Intro- 
duction, by H. S. FoxwtLL, M.A. 8vo. 

$7.50. 

MALLOCK.— Classes and Masses, or 
Wealth, Wages, and Welfare in the 

United Kingdom. A Handbook of Social 
Facts for Political Thinkers and Speakers. 
i6mo. $1.25. 

MALLOCK.— Labor and the Popular 

Welfare. New edition, nmo. 90 cts. 

MAYO-SMITH.— Statistics and Sociol- 
ogy. By Richmond Mayo-Smith, Ph.D., 
Professor of rolitical and Social Science in 
Columbia University. 8vo. $3.00, net. 

NICHOLSON.— A Treatise on Money 
and Essays on Monetary Problems. 

By J. Shield Nicholson, M. A., D. Sc, 
Third Edition. With a New Second Part of 
A Treatise on Money. i2mo. $2.00. 

Strikes and Social Problems. $1.25. 

PLEHN.— Introduction to Public Fi- 
nance. By Carl C. Plehn, Ph. D., As- 
sistant Professor in the University of Cali- 
fornia. i2mo. Cloth, pp. xii.+364. Price, 
$1.60, net. 

ROUSIERS.— The Labor Question in 
Britain. By Paul De Rousihrs. With 
a Preface by Henri de Tourville. Trans- 
lated by F. L. D. Herbertson, B.A. 8vo. 
$4.00 net. 

SELIGMAN— Essays in Taxation. By 

Edwin R. A. Seligman, Professor of Polit- 
ical Economy and Finance, Columbia Uni- 
versity. 8vo. $3.00, net. 

SMART.— Studies in Economics. By 

William Smart, M. A., LL.D., Lecturer 
on Political Economy in the University of 

Glasgow, nmo. $1.25. 

SMART.— An Introduction to the The- 
ory of Value on the Lines of Menger, 
Wieser, and Bohm-Bawerk. By Will- 
iam Smart, M.A. i2mo. #1.25. 

VON HALLE.— Trusts, or Industrial 
Combinations and Coalitions in the 
United States. By Ernst Von Halle. 

I21T10. $I-2S. 



THE MACMII.LA3S" COMPANY, 

66 Fiftn Avenue, New York. 



NKCENT PUBLICATIONS 

OF THE 

AMERICAN ECONOMIC ASSOCIATION. 



MOUOGHAPHS. 

(Issued at irregular intervals.) 
VOLUME XI. 

N03. i, 2 and 3. Race Traits and Tendencies of the American Nerro. 
By F. L. Hoffman, F.S.S., Statistician to the Prudential Insurance 
Company of America. Price, $1.25 ; cloth, $2.00. 

No. 4. Appreciation and Interest. By Irving Fisher, Ph. D., Yale Univer- 
sity. Price, 73 cents. 



ECOUOMIO STUDIES. 

(Issued bi-monthly.) 
VOLUME I. 
No. 2. The Adjustment of Wages to Efficiency. Three papers: Gain 
Sharing, by H. R. Towne; The Premium Plan, by F. A. Halsey; 
A Piece-Rate System, by F. W. Taylor. Price, 50 cents. 
No. 3. The Populist Movement. By F. L. McVey, Ph. D. Price, 50 cents. 
No. 4. The Present Monetary Situation. An address by Professor W. 
• Lexis, University of Gottingen. Translated by John Cummings, 
Ph. D. Price, 50 cents. 
Nos. 5-G. The Street Railway Problem in Cleveland. By William Row- 
land Hopkins. Price, 75 cents. 

VOLUME II. 

Hand-Book and Report of the Ninth Annual Meeting. Price, 50 cents. 
No. 1. Economics and Jurisprudence. By Henry C. Adams, Ph. D. 

Price, 50 cents. 
No. 2. The Saloon Question in Chicago. By John E. George, Ph. B. 
Price, 50 cents. 

Price of the several volumes, unbound, $4.00 each. Bound in cloth, $j.oo each 
for single volumes, $4.00 for each additional volume. The bound set of ten 
volumes, $41.00, sent prepaid. Any bound volume will be sent post-paid to mem- 
bers for 7j cents in exchange for the unbound numbers, if returned prepaid in 
good condition. Copies can also be furnished, in half morocco, at 30 cents per 
volume additional to the price in cloth. 

Separate subscriptions by non-members, libraries, etc., for the Studies, $2.30 
per year ; or $4.00 for all the publications. Any single monograph may be ob- 
tained at the price given in the list. 

One-sixth Discount to Members and Subscribers on all Orders. 



Address applications for membership 
and inquiries to 



Address Subscriptions and orders 
for Studies and Monographs, to the 
publishers, 
Sec'y American Economic Association, THF AfA CMTT T A N C O 

Ithaca, N. Y. I 66 Fifth Avenue, New York. 



JOHNS HOPKINS UNIVERSITY 

Studies in History and Politics. 

Edited by HERBERT B. ADAMS. 

FIFTEENTH SERIES.— 1897.— Subscription, $3.00. 

AMERICAN ECONOMIC HISTORY. 

The Tobacco Industry in Virginia since i860. By B. W. Arnold. 50 cents.' 

I., II., III., IV., V. The Street Railway System of Philadelphia. By F. W. Spieks. 

Paper, 50 cents ; cloth, $1.00. 
The Financial History of Baltimore. By J. H. Hollander. 
The American School of Political Economy. By Sidney Sherwood. 
History and Theory of Trusts. By H. L. Moore. 
State Banking in Maryland. By A. C. Bryan. 

State Tax Commissions in the United States. By J. W. Chapman. 
Economic History of the Baltimore and Ohio Railroad. By M. Reizenstein. 
The South American Trade of Baltimore. By F. R. Rutter. 
Irrigation in Utah. By C. H. Brough. 

Other papers will be from time to time announced. 



ANNUAL SERIES, 1883-1895. 

SERIES I.— Local Institutions. 479 pages. $4.00. 
SERIES II.— Institutions and Economics. 629 pages. $4.00. 
SERIES III. — Maryland, Virginia and 'Washington. 595 pages. $4.00. 
SERIES IV. — Municipal Government and Land Tenure. 600 pages. $3.00. 
SERIES V. — Municipal Government, History and Politics. 559 pages. $3.50. 
SERIES VI.— The History of Co-operation in the United States. ^40 pages. $3. 50. 
SERIES VII.— Social Science, Municipal and Federal Government. $3.50. 
SERIES VIII.— History, Politics and Education. 625 pages. 8vo. #3.50. 
SERIES IX. — Education, History and Politics. 640 pages. Bvo. $3. 50. 
SERIES X. — Church and State : Columbus and America. 630 pages. 8vo. $3.50. 
SERIES XI. — Labor, Slaves and Self-Government. 574 pages 8vo. $3.50. 
SERIES XII.— Institutional and Economic History. 626 pages. 8vo. #3.50. 
SERIES XIII.— South Carolina, Maryland and Virginia. 606 pages. 8vo. $3.50. 
SERIES XIV.— Baltimore, Slavery and Constitutional History. 592 pp. 8vo. $3.50. 



RECENT EXTRA VOLUMES. 

The Supreme Court of the United States. By W. W. Willoughby. 124 pp. 8vo,cl. $1.15, 
The Intercourse between Japan and the United States. By Inazo (Ota) Nitobe. 198 

pp. 8vo, cloth. $1.25. 
State and Federal Government in Switzerland. By John Martin Vincent. 225 pp. 

8vo, cloth. $1.50. 
Spanish Institutions of the Southwest. By Frank W. Blackmar. 380 pp. and 31 plates. 

8vo, cloth. $2.00. 
Introduction to the Study of the Constitution. ByM.M.CoHN. 250 pp. 8vo, cloth. $1.50. 
The Old English Manor. By Prof. C. M. Andrews. 280 pp. 8vo, cloth. $1.50. 
America: Its Geographical History, 1492-1892. By Dr. W. B. Scaife. 176 pp. 8vo, 

cloth. $1.50. 
Florentine Life During the Renaissance. By W. B. Scaife. 256 pp. 8vo, cloth. $1.50. 
The Southern Quakers and Slavery. By S. B. Weeks. 414 pp. 8vo, cloth. $2.00. 
Contemporary American Opinion of the French Revolution. By C. D. Hansen. (In 

press.) 



The set of fourteen series is now offered, uniformly bound in cloth, for library use, 
for $42, and including subscription to the current (fifteenth) series, for $45.00. 

The fifteen series, with fourteen extra volumes, altogether twenty-nine volumes, 
in cloth as above, for $63.00. 

All business communications should be addressed to THE JOHNS HOPKINS 
PRESS, Baltimore, Maryland. 



American Academy of Political and Social Science. 

Founded Dec. 14, 1889. Chartered Feb. 14, 1891 

President, Edmund J. James. Treasurer, Stuart Wood. 

Corresponding Sec'y, H. R. Sfager. 

Persons interested in the political and social sciences are eligible 
for membership. The annual membership fee is $5.00. The pub- 
lications of the Academy in the form of the Annals are sent to 
each member free of charge. A full account of the Academy and 
its work will be sent on application. 



RECENT PUBLICATIONS. 

Silver in China. 

By Talcott Williams, LL. D., Philadelphia Price, 25c. 
The Quantity Theory of Money. 

By Prof. W. A. Scott, University of Wisconsin. Price, 15c. 
Industry and Machinery in the United States. 

By Prof. E. Levasseur, Paris. Price, 25c. 

A Comparative Study of the State Constitutions of the American Revo- 
lution. 

By W. C. Webster, Esq., New York. Price, 35c. 
Railway Pooling. 

By Hon. Martin A. Knapp, Washington. Price, 35c. 
The Union Pacific Railway. 

By Dr. John P. Davis, Brooklyn. Price, 35c. 
The First Apportionment of Federal Representatives in the United States. 
By Professor Edmund J. James, University of Chicago. Price 35c. 
Postal Savings Banks. 

By Edw. T. Heyn, Esq., New York. Price, 25c. 
Principles of Sociology. 

By Professor Lester F. Ward, Washington. Price, 25c. 
Crime and the Census. 

By Prof. Roland P. Falkner, University of Penna. Price, 25c. 



The ANNALS, the official organ of the Society, is in its ninth 
volume. A complete catalogue of 188 publications will be sent on 
application. Address 

American Academy of Political and Social Science, 

STATION B, PHILADELPHIA. 



LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 



022 255 337 4 



